Thomas Aquinas

189. After suggesting that God’s judgment is true and refuting the contrary opinion [n. 178], the Apostle here unfolds the truth of God’s judgment. First, he presents his intention; secondly, he manifests it, there [v. 7; n. 195] at To those who by patience. 190. First, he states facts about God’s judgment in regard to two things, namely, persons and their works. 100 In regard to works, God does not repay in the present life according to one’s works, for sometimes He gives grace to evil-doers, as to the apostle Paul, who obtained mercy after being a blasphemer and persecutor. But this will not be so on the day of judgment, when the time comes to judge according to justice: "At the set time which I appoint, I will judge with equity" (Ps 75:2); hence, another passage says: "Requite them according to their works" (Ps 28:4). With regard to persons, equality of retribution will be observed toward all: "We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ" (2 Cor 5:10). 191. However, it seems that retribution will not be made according to one’s works, because an eternal punishment will be paid for a temporal sin. The answer, as Augustine says in the City of God, is that in justice’s repayment equality in time between sin and punishment is not a consideration, because even in human judgment for a sin of adultery committed in a short time the death penalty is inflicted. Here the legislator is not interested in the time it takes to punish, but rather that the adulterer’s death will forever separate him from the society of the living. Thus, in his way man, too, punishes a temporal sin with an eternal punishment. Consequently, it is not strange if sins committed against charity, through which is formed a society between God and men, are punished eternally by the divine judgment. 192. The justice of this is clear on three counts. First, on account of the infinite dignity of God Who is sinned against. For a sin is graver, the greater the dignity of the person sinned against, just as it is a greater crime to strike a prince than to strike a private citizen. Consequently, since the guilt of mortal sin 101 is in a sense infinite, an infinite punishment should balance it. Therefore, since it cannot be infinite in intensity, it must be infinite in duration. 193. Secondly, on account of the will of the sinner. For whoever sins mortally turns from the unchangeable good and fixes his end in a changeab1e good, as a fornicator in a pleasure of the flesh and a covetous person in money. And because the end is sought for itself, whoever seeks the end is borne toward it and wills to possess it always, if something else does not hinder. Hence, one who sins mortally has the will to remain in sin forever, unless something changes him accidentally, as when he fears punishment. Consequently, it is fitting that if a man through his will seeks sin to be enjoyed forever, he should be punished for it eternally. For God, Who sees the heart, directs His special attention to the will of the sinner. 194. Thirdly, on account of the effect of sin, namely, the withdrawal of grace, from which it follows that a man left to himself would remain forever in sin, from which he cannot be extricated except by the help of grace. But it is not fitting that, the sin remaining, the penalty should cease; consequently, the penalty lasts forever. The statement, to render to every man according to his works, does not mean according to equality of works because the reward exceeds the merit, but according to proportion, because He will render good to the good and better to the better. The same applies to evil. 195. Then when he says to those who by patience (v. 7) he clarifies his statement: first, in regard to works; secondly, in regard to persons, there [v. 9b; n. 201] at on every soul. In regard to works he shows the truth of God’s judgment: 102 first, to the good; secondly, to the wicked, there [v. 8; n. 198] at but for those who are factious. 196. In regard to the first there are two things to consider, namely, merit and reward [n. 197]. Three things combine or merit: first, patience, which can mean God’s patience as referred above: "Do you presume upon the riches of his goodness and patience?" (v.4). Then those who by patience in well-doing would be those who make good use of God’s patience by doing good. Or it can mean man’s patience, and this in two ways: in one way, so that patience implies tolerating adversity with equanimity of heart. For it is necessary that one not give up good works on account of the evils he suffers, and this is what he says: by patience in well-doing. "Patience has a perfect work" (Jas 1:4); "By your patience you will gain your lives" (Lk 21:19). In another way, patience can be taken for long-suffering or for perseverance, which keeps a person from abandoning a good work on account of tedium: "You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand" (Jas 5:8); "you have need of patience" (Heb 10:36). The second feature of merit is the goodness of a work, which is good, if it is directed to its proper end and if it conforms to its proper rule, which is God’s law and human reason: "Let us not grow weary in well-doing" (Gal 6:9). The third feature is a right intention, i.e., to seek eternal life, so that in the evils a man suffers or in the good he does he is not seeking something temporal, but eternal: "Seek first the kingdom of God" (Mt 6:33). 103 197. In regard to the reward he touches on three things: the first is glory, which signifies the splendor of the saints: either intrinsic glory, with which the mind will be filled: "The Lord will fill your soul with brightness" (Is 58:11), or external glory, with which their body will shine: "The righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their father" (Mt 13:43); "Let the faithful exult in glory" (Ps 149:5). The second is honor, through which is signified the dignity of the saints and the reverence paid to them by every creature. For they will be kings and priests: "Thou hast made them a kingdom and priests to our God" (Rev 5:10) and will be numbered among the sons of God: "Why has he been numbered among the sons of God?" (Wis 5:5); "Thy friends are made exceedingly honorable, O God" (Ps 139:17). The third is immortality, because that glory and honor will not pass, as they do in this world: "They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable" (1 Cor 9:25). 198. Then when he says, but for those who are factious, he shows the truth of a God’s judgment on the wicked and touches on sin and punishment. In regard to sin three things are mentioned. The first is the obstinacy of the factious, which can be understood of man toward God calling him to Himself by His blessings, against which a man seems to struggle by resisting them: "Behold, while I am yet alive with you, you have always been rebellious against the Lord" (Dt 31:27). Secondly, it is understood of man’s struggle against faith: "Avoid disputing with words" (2 Ti 2:14). Thirdly, it can be understood of men struggling with one another, which is contrary to charity, the mother of the virtues: "Where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice" (Jas 3:16). 104 The second is the hardness of those who do not obey the truth. This can be understood in one way of the truth of faith: "If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?" (Jn 9:46); in another way, of the truth of God’s justice, to which they do not acquiesce, not believing the truth of His justice: "You say: ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’" (Ez 18:29). In a third way, it can be understood of the truth of life, in which they do not acquiesce who live perversely: "He who does what is true comes to the light" (Jn 3:21). The third is malice; hence, he says: but obey [believe] wickedness, either because they consent to those who urge wickedness: "An evil-doer listens to wicked lips" (Pr 17:4); or because they believe that sins will not be punished, which would make God wicked: "Do not say: ‘I have sinned and what happened to me’?" (Si 5:4); or they believe wickedness, i.e., unbelief, namely, teachings against the faith: "So that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness" (2 Th 2:12). 199. In regard to punishment four things are mentioned, which can be distinguished in two ways. In one way, so that wrath, i.e., punishment and corporal vengeance is understood to come after the judgment: "A day of wrath is that day" (Zeph l:15); fury during the judgment, when the wicked will be angry at themselves for the sins they committed: "It was we who strayed from the way of truth" (Wis 5:6). Tribulation and distress pertain to the soul separated from the body before the resurrection: "When distress and anguish come upon you" (Pr 1:27). 105 200. Or they can be distinguished in another way, so that the first two are taken on the part of God, Whose wrath is His disposition to punish, which is horrible for the wicked: "They will call to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the force [?] of the one sitting on the throne and from the fury of the Lamb" (Rev 6:16). His fury refers to the fact that He will consider sinners unworthy of eternal life: "I swore in my anger that they should not enter into my rest" (Ps 95:11). But the other two are taken on the part of man. The word, tribulation, comes from tribulus, a prickly plant; hence, anything that causes pain can pertain to tribulation: "The sound of the day of the Lord is bitter; the mighty man meets tribulation there" (Zeph 1:14). But distress is so called from the fact that a man’s spirit is in anguish, being unable to find a remedy against the evils he fears or already suffers: "I am hemmed in on every side and know not what to choose" (Sus 1:22); "Will God hear his cry when trouble comes upon him?" (Jb 27:9). 201. Then when he says on every soul (9b) he shows the truth of God’s judgment in regard to persons. First, he proposes its equity; secondly, he assigns the reason for this, there [v. 11; n. 205] at For there is no respect of persons; thirdly, he explains the reason, there [v. 12; n. 207] All who have sinned. 202. The truth of the divine judgment in regard to persons is shown, first, as it affects the wicked, when he says, for every human being who does evil, i.e., against every soul, because just as the glory of the saints passes from the soul to the body, so the punishment of the wicked is first and chiefly in the soul and secondly in the body which, 106 on account of defect or sin, will rise capable of suffering: "The soul that sins shall die" (Ez 18:4). 203. But he says, the Jew first and also the Greek, because a greater punishment was due the Jews as knowing God’s will through the Law: "That servant who knew his master’s will but did not make ready or act according to his will shall receive a severe beating" (Lk 12:47). Similarly, Christians are punished more severely than unbelievers for the same sin, e.g., adultery or theft: "How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the son of God and profaned the blood of the covenant in which he was sanctified?" (Heb 10:29). But as to total punishment, that of unbelievers is more severe on account of the sin of unbelief, which is the gravest. Hence, it says in 2 Pt (2:2) that "God’s wrath rests upon unbelievers." 204. Secondly, he shows this in regard to the good: first, he repeats the two things mentioned above, namely, glory and honor, but the third, namely, peace, he mentions instead of immortality, which includes peace among many other things. For a man’s peace cannot be complete as long as he fears he might lose the good things he has; rather, one has true peace of heart when he has everything he desires and no fear of losing then: "My people will abide in a peaceful habitation" (Is 32:18). In these things, too, he gives primacy to the Jews, because they were first promised to them, and the Gentiles entered into their promises: "Others have labored and you have entered into their labors" (Jn 4:38). 107 205. Then when he says, God shows no partiality, he assigns the reason for his statement, namely, because there is no respect of persons with God: "Truly I perceive that God shows no partiality" (Ac 10:34). Respect of persons is opposed to distributive justice, through which one distributes to each according to the person’s worth; therefore, there is respect of persons, when more is given or less is given without regard to worth. This happens when the person rather than his qualifications is accepted as a cause. In this case there is a cause, i.e., a rule of action, but the person is taken as the cause of doing something. Thus, if one gives more inheritance to another on account of a blood relationship, it is not respect of persons, because this relationship is a fitting cause why he should receive such benefits. But if a prelate gives more ecclesiastical goods to someone on account of a blood relationship, it would be respect of persons, if some other qualification were not present. For blood relationship is not a suitable reason for receiving spiritual goods. Therefore, because God does everything for the best of reasons, respect of persons does not enter into His actions: "Wisdom orders all things well" (Wis 8:l). 206. Yet He seems to be a respecter of persons, because He abandons some sinners and calls others to Himself. The answer is that respect of persons is opposed to justice; hence, it finds its sphere in the payment of debts, with which justice is concerned. But God calls sinners to repentance not from debt but as a favor: "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works" (Rom 11:6); "Not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy he saved us" (Titus 3:5). 108 In such gifts not only God, but man too, is free to give to whom he will: "Am I not allowed to give what I choose with what belongs to me?" (Mt 20:15). 207. Then when he says All who have sinned (v.12) he explains the reason. For if all who sinned are punished, it is clear that there is no respect of persons with God. Hence, he speaks first of those who have not received the Law, saying that all who have sinned without the Law received from God by Moses, will perish without the law, i.e., will be condemned, but not for transgression of the Law: "Because no one understands, they will perish forever" (Job 4:20 Vul.). Secondly, he speaks of those who received the written law, and he says that all who have sinned under the Law, i.e. after the written Law, will be judged by the Law, i.e., precisely for having transgressed a precept of the Law: "The word which I have spoken will be his judge on the last day" (Jn 12:48). 208. The Apostle’s manner of speaking here has been taken as an occasion of error by some. Because the Apostle does not say that all who sinned under the Law will perish by the Law, as he had said of those who are without the Law that they will perish without the law, some believed that those who sin after receiving the law will be judged by some means, i.e., in the present, but will not perish. But as the Gloss [of Lombard, col. 1344] says: "What Christian would say that the Jew will not perish for not believing in Christ, when the Lord says that it will be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for them" (Mt 10:15). Hence Ez (18:32) says: "I have no pleasure in the death of the sinner." 109 209. But the Apostle uses these different expressions because, as Gregory says on Jb (36:6): "He gives judgment to the poor," some will perish in the future judgment without being judged, i.e., the wicked who are without faith and the Law: "The wicked will not stand in the judgment" (Ps 1:5), namely, because there is no basis for discussion with one entirely estranged from God: "He who does not believe is condemned" (Jn 3:18). But others who sin in spite of having received the Law and faith will perish in such a way as also to be judged through a discussion held with them; hence, Ez (34:17): "I judge between sheep and sheep, rams and he-goats," just as a king condemns enemies without a hearing, but citizens with a careful examination, as Gregory says.

210. After confuting the human judgment with which the Gentiles and Jews judged one another and commending God’s judgment [n. 169], the Apostle now undertakes to show that the things in which the Jews gloried do not suffice for their salvation. First, he states his position; secondly, he answers arguments against his position, in chapter 3, there [n. 246] at Then what advantage has the Jew? The Jews gloried in two things, namely, the Law and circumcision, which stemmed not from the Law but from the patriarchs, as stated in John 7(:22). First, therefore, he shows that the Jewish Law heard or accepted was not enough for salvation; secondly, he shows the same about circumcision, there [v. 25; n. 237] at Circumcision indeed. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he sets forth his position; secondly, he clarifies it, there [v. 14; n. 213] at For when Gentiles. 211. In regard to the first he sets forth two things: one by rejecting; the other by asserting. For he rejects the Jewish opinion that they were made righteous by merely hearing the Law. Hence he says: I have said that all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law, for it is not the hearers of the law, i.e., in virtue of having heard the Law, who are righteous before God, even if they are deemed righteous before men: "Every one who hears these words of mine and does not do them is like a foolish man" 111 (Mt 7:26); "If anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who observes his natural face in a mirror..." (Jas 1:23). Secondly, he declares that the doers of the Law are righteous, when he says, but the doers of the law will be justified: "Everyone who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man" (Mt 7:24); "Be doers of the word and not hearers only" (Jas 1:22); "A good understanding have all those who practice it" (Ps 111:10). 212. But this point seems to conflict with his own statement below (3:20) that "no human being will be justified in his sight by the works of the law." Consequently, no one is justified precisely for doing the works of the Law. The answer is that justification can be taken in three ways: in one way, in regard to reputation; then one is said to be justified, when he is regarded as just: "You have made your sisters appear justified," i.e., by reputation (Ez 16:51). In this sense, the doers of the law are justified, i.e., are considered just before God and men. Secondly, by doing what is just: "This man went down to his home justified" (Lk 18:14), because the publican performed a work of justice by confessing his sin. In this way is verified the statement that the doers of the law will be justified, i.e., by performing the justices of the Law. In a third way justification can be considered in regard to the cause of justice, so that a person is said to be justified, when he newly receives justice, as in (5:1): "Since we are justified by faith, we are at peace with God." It must not be supposed, however, that the doers of the Law are justified as though acquiring justice through the works of the Law. This cannot be accomplished either by the ceremonial works, which confer no 112 justifying grace, or by the moral works, from which the habit of justice is not acquired; rather, we do such works in virtue of an infused habit of justice. 213. Then when he says For when Gentiles who (v.14) he clarifies his position. First, he shows that doers of the Law are justified even without being hearers; secondly, that hearers of the Law are not justified without observing the Law, there [v. 17; n. 224] at But if you are called a Jew. In regard to the first he does three things: first, he mentions the worthiness of those who observe the Law without having heard it; secondly, he clarifies what he had said, there [v. 15; n. 218] at They show that what the law requires; thirdly, he proves it, there [v. 15b; n. 219] at while their conscience also bears witness. 214. In regard to the first he touches on three things relating to the Gentiles [nn. 215, 217]. First, their lack of the Law, saying, when Gentiles who do not have the law, namely, the divine, which they have not received. For the Law was not delivered to the Gentiles but to the Jews: "The law which Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the congregations of Jacob" (Si 24:24); "He has not dealt thus with any other nation" (Ps 147:20); "When Moses commanded us a law, as a possession for the assembly of Jacob" (Dt 33:4). From this it is clear that the Gentiles did not sin by not observing the ceremonies of the Law. 113 215. Secondly, he commends their observance of law, when he says, they do by nature what the law requires, i.e., the moral precepts, which flow from a dictate of natural reason. Thus Job (1:1) was blameless and upright, fearing God and turning away from evil. Hence he himself says: "My foot has held fast to his steps; I have kept his ways" (Jb 23:11). 216. But the expression, by nature, causes some difficulty. For it seems to favor the Pelagians, who taught that man could observe all the precepts of the Law by his own natural powers. Hence, by nature should mean nature reformed by grace. For he is speaking of Gentiles converted to the faith, who began to obey the moral precepts of the Law by the help of Christ’s grace. Or by nature can mean by the natural law showing them what should be done, as in Ps 4 (v.6): "There are many who say, ‘Who shows us good things!’ The light of thy countenance, O Lord, is signed upon us," i.e., the light of natural reason, in which is God’s image. All this does not rule out the need of grace to move the affections any more than the knowledge of sin through the Law (Rom 3:20) exempts from the need of grace to move the affections. 217. Thirdly, he shows their worth in that they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law, inasmuch as they function as a law to themselves by instructing and inducing themselves to the good, because the Philosopher says: Law is a statement laying down an obligation and proceeding from prudence and understanding (Eth. 11). Therefore, it says in 1 Tim (l:9) that "the law is not laid down for the just," who is not compelled by a law outside of him, "but for the lawless," who need to be compelled from without. 114 It is, of course, the highest level of greatness among men, when they are induced toward the good not by others but by themselves. The second level belongs to those who are induced by others but without force. The third belongs to those who need to be forced to do good. The fourth belongs to those who cannot be directed to the good even by force: "In vain have I smitten your children; they took no correction" (Jer 2:30). 218. Then when he says They show (v. 15) he explains how they are a law to themselves. This can be likened to a law presented to man from without and which it is customary to deliver in writing on account of the memory’s weakness; whereas, those who observe the law without externally hearing the law show that what the law requires is written "not with ink, but" first and chiefly "with the Spirit of the living God" (2 Cor 3:3), and secondly through study: "Write them on the tablet of your heart" (Pr 3:3), i.e., the precepts of wisdom. Hence, here, too, he continues, on their hearts, not on parchment or on stone or copper tablets: "I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts" (Jer 31:33). 219. Then when he says their conscience also bearing witness (v.15) he proves his statement that the work of the Law is written in their hearts by citing actions which announce its presence. First [cf. n. 222], he mentions those actions, one of which is the witness of conscience. He touches on this when he says, while their conscience also bears witness, conscience being the application of one’s knowledge in judging whether some action was good or bad to do. 115 Hence, this conscience sometimes gives testimony of good: "Our boast is this, the testimony of our conscience" (2 Cor 1:12); and sometimes of evil: "Your conscience knows that many times you have yourself cursed others" (Ec 7:23). However, no one can testify that an action is good or bad, unless he has knowledge of the Law. Hence, if conscience bears witness about good or evil, this is a clear sign that the work of the Law has been written in the man’s heart. 220. Another function is to accuse and defend. Here, too, knowledge of the Law is required. In regard to this he says, and their conflicting thoughts accuse [accusantium] or perhaps excuse [defendentium], i.e., accusantibus or defendentibus, following the Greek practice whereby a genitive is used in place of an ablative. And these are conflicting. For an accusing thought in regard to some action arises in a man, when he has reason to suppose that he has acted evilly: "Mow I rebuke you and lay the charge before you" (Ps 50:21); "The show of their countenance witnesses against them" (Is 3:9). But sometimes a defending thought arises, when he has reason to suppose that he has acted well: "My heart does not reproach me for any of my days" (Jb 27:6). Between this accusation and defense the testimony of conscience has the final say. 221. This passage, their conscience bears witness, can be interpreted in another way, so that there is consciousness not only of one’s deeds but also of thoughts; but the first is better. 222. But because testimony, accusation, and defense occur during a trial, he mentions the time, when he says, on that day. He says this not to designate the quality of 116 the time but the disclosure of things hidden: "I will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness" (1 Cor 4:5). Yet it is sometimes called night on account of the uncertainty of that hour: "At midnight there was a cry" (Mt 25:6). The accusing or defending thoughts are not those which will arise on the day of judgment, because on that day each one’s salvation or damnation will be clear to him; rather, such thoughts as exist now and the testimony of conscience that exists now will be represented to a man on that day by divine power, as Augustine says in book 2 of The City of God. Indeed, the recognition of those thoughts that remain in the soul seems to be nothing lees, as a Gloss says, than the debt of punishment or the reward, which follow them. 223. Then he shows the author of the judgment, when he says, when God judges: "He will judge the world with righteousness" (Ps 96:13). He also describes what the judgment will concern, when he says, the secrets of men, matters about which men cannot now judges. "He will bring to light the thing now hidden in darkness" (1 Cor 4:5). He also shows the teaching from which faith in this judgment is had when he says, according to my gospel, i.e., preaching by me: "On the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word" (Mt 12:36). He says, according to my gospel, although he could not say, "my baptism," and be a minister of both, because in baptism a man’s diligence effects nothing, but in preaching 117 the Gospel the preacher’s industry achieves something: "When you read this you can perceive my insight in the mystery of Christ" (Eph 3:4) Then he mentions the judge, when he says, by Christ Jesus, Who has been appointed by God to be "judge of the living and the dead" (Ac 10:42); "The Father has given all judgment to the Son" (Jn 5:20), Who will appear to the good and the wicked during the judgment: to the good in the glory of the godhead: "Your eyes will see the king in his beauty" (Is 33:17), but to the wicked in His human form: "Every eye will see him" (Rev 1:7).

224. After showing that the doers of the Law are justified even without being hearers, which pertained to the Gentiles, the Apostle now shows that hearers are not justified, unless they are doers, which pertains to the Jews. First, therefore, he shows the Jews’ privileged state in receiving the Law; secondly, their shortcomings in transgressing the Law, there [v. 21; n. 232] at You then who teach others. He shows their privileged state on three counts: first, in being the race to whom the Law was given; secondly, as regards the Law itself, there [v. 17b; n. 226] at and rely upon the law; 119 thirdly, as regards the effect or work of the Law, there [v. 18; n. 227] at and know his will. 225. In regard to race he says, But if you call yourself a Jew, which is an honorable name: "Judah became his sanctuary" (Ps 114:2); "Salvation is from the Jews" (Jn14:22). They are called Jews not after Judas Maccabeus as some say, probably on the ground that he united and protected that people, when they were scattered: "He gladly fought for Israel" (1 Macc 3:2); for the name, "Jews," was in use before his time, as in Est (8:l6): "The Jews had light and gladness..." Rather, it seems that the Jews were named after the patriarch Judah: "Judah, your brothers shall praise you" (Gen 49:8); for in the time of Roboam, when ten tribes seceded from his kingdom and adored a golden calf, they were led away captive by the Assyrians (1 Sam l7). Scripture makes no mention of their return; rather, the land remained occupied by strangers later called Samaritans. But two tribes, Judah and Benjamin, remained in the kingdom of Roboam and persevered in the word of God. Although they were led away captive to Babylon, they were permitted to return to their native land by Cyrus, the Persian king (1 Ezra 1). Then, because the tribe of Judah was the greater, the entire group was named after him: not only those from the tribe of Benjamin but those from the other tribes who joined them. 226. Then when he says and rest on the law (17b) he mentions their prerogative in regard to the Law. First, in regard to the Law itself, when he says, and rest on the law, as certifying what they believed and did. For an intellect in doubt is not at rest but is solicited by both 120 sides; but once it has the certainty of wisdom it rests: "When I enter my house, I shall find rest with her" (Wis 8:16). Secondly, in regard to the lawgiver, when he adds, and boast of your relation to God, i.e., in their worship and knowledge of one God: "Let him who glories glory in this, that he understands and knows me" (Jer 9:24); "Let him who boasts boast in the Lord" (1 Cor 1:31). 227. Then when he adds and know his will (v. 18) he mentions their prerogative in regard to the fruit of the Law: first, with respect to the person himself; secondly, with respect to others, there [v. 19; n. 229] at and if you are sure. 228. In regard to the first he mentions two fruits. The first corresponds to boasting of their relation to God, when he says, and know his will, i.e., what God wants us to do: "That you may prove what is the will of God" (Rom 12:2). The second corresponds to their resting in the law, when he says, and approve what is excellent, i.e., able to select not only good from bad things but better from less good. Hence someone asked: "Which is the great commandment?" (Mt 22:36). And this, because you are instructed in the law: "Happy the man whom you teach your law and teach him about your law" (Ps 94:12) 229. Then he mentions its fruit with respect to others who find themselves in three different situations, so far as knowledge of the Law is concerned [n. 230ff]. For some are entirely ignorant of the Law, because they lack natural talent, just as a man is physically blind, because he lacks visual power: "We grope for the wall like the 121 blind" (Is 59:10). To such persons cannot be given the light of knowledge enabling them to see by themselves what to do; rather, they must be led, as the blind are, by commanding them to do this or that, even though they do not understand the reason for the command: "I became an eye to the blind" (Jb 29:15); "They are blind and leaders of the blind" (Mt 15:14). Others are ignorant through lack of training, being as it were in the exterior darkness and not enlightened by teaching. To such persons a wise man can offer the light of training, so that they will understand what is commanded. This is why he says, a light to those who are in darkness: "To give light to those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death" (Lk 1:79). 230. Secondly, he touches on those who are on the way to knowledge they have not yet attained either through lack of full instruction; hence he says, a corrector of the foolish, i.e., of those who have not yet received wisdom who are said to be instructed, i.e., free from ignorance which is present in everyone from the beginning when they are first instructed: "Do you have children? Discipline them" (Si 7:23). In another way, through lack of age, as children. Hence he says, a teacher of children: "Where is the teacher of little ones?" (Is 33:18). 231. A third group are already advanced in knowledge, but they need instruction from the wise in order to possess the authoritative sayings of wisdom as their rule or pattern. In regard to this he says, having in the law the embodiment [pattern] of knowledge: "Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me" (2 Tim 1:13); "Mark those who so live as you have an example in us" (Phil 3:17). 122 However, people so patterned must be instructed by the authority of their forbears, if they are to know what has been handed down in the Law. Therefore, he says, of knowledge: "Wisdom gave him knowledge of holy things" (Wis 10:10). This is also necessary if they are to know the true understanding of what has been handed down. That is why he says, and truth: "Send out thy light and thy truth" (Ps 43:3). 232. Then when he says you then who teach others (v.21) he indicates some of their failings. First, failings toward themselves, when he says, You then who teach others by directing them to the good, will you not teach yourself? This can be taken as a question asked with an overtone of indignation or with an overtone of mildness which, nevertheless, suggests wickedness on their part, as it does in Job (4:3): "Behold, you have instructed many" and (4:5): "The scourge has now touched you and you are dismayed." Secondly, their failings toward their neighbor: first, in regard to things taken furtively, when he says: While you preach against stealing, do you steal?: "Your princes are rebels and companions of thieves" (Is 1:23); then in regard to defiling another person through adultery, when he says: You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery?: "They are all adulterers, like a heated oven" (Hos 7:4); "Each neighing for his neighbor’s wife" (Jer 5:8). 234. Thirdly, he indicates their failings with respect to God: first, that they sin against His worship, when he says: You who abhor idols, since you know from the Law that they are not to be adored, do you commit sacrilege by abusing the things of divine worship. 123 This they did during the Old Law: "You profane it when you say that the Lord’s table is polluted" (Mal 1:12) and later, when they blasphemed Christ: "It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons" (Mt 12:24). 235. Secondly, that they sin against His glory, when he says: You who glory in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? For as observance of the Law by good works is an occasion for others to honor God, so its transgression by evil works is an occasion for others to blaspheme: "That they may see your good deeds and glorify God" (1 Pt 2:12). Hence, he says in 1 Tim (6:1): "Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed" and in Ps 119 (v.158) it is said: "I look at the faithless with disgust, because they do not keep thy commands." 236. In support of this he quotes an authority, when he says The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, i.e., because the Gentiles, noting the evil practices of the Jews, laid it to evil training dictated by the Law. He says: it is written, namely, in Is 52(:5), "Their rulers wail, and continually all the day my name is despised" and in Ez 36(:22), "It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, but for the sake of my holy name which you have profaned among the nations." 237. Then when he says Circumcision (v.25) he shows that circumcision is not sufficient for salvation any more than the Law is, and for the same reason, namely, that without circumcision there is value in the Law’s observance, without which circumcision has no benefit, as was said above. In regard to this he does three things. 124 First, he compares circumcision to the circumcised Jews; secondly, to the uncircumcised Gentiles, there [v. 26; n. 240] at So, if a man who is uncircumcised; thirdly, he explains what he had said, there [v. 28; n. 242] at For it is not the one who is so outwardly. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows how circumcision is of value; secondly, how not, there [v. 25b; n. 239] at but if you break the law. 238. First, therefore, he says: Circumcision indeed is of value, inasmuch as it remits original sin; hence, it is written in Gen (17:14): "Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people." But it will benefit you as an adult, if you obey the law, just as profession benefits a religious, if he keeps the rule. For circumcision is a form of profession obliging men to observe the Law: "I testify again to every man who receives circumcision that he is bound to keep the whole law" (Gal 5:3). However, the Apostle’s statement in Gal (5:2) that "if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you," refers to the era after grace; but now he is referring to the time before the passion of Christ, when circumcision had status. 239. Secondly, there at but if you break the law (v. 25b), he shows how circumcision has no value, when he says: If you, a Jewish adult, break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision, i.e., has no more value than your previous condition, because you do not observe what you profess by circumcision: "All these nations are uncircumcised and all the house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart" (Jer 125 9:26). In fact they are more guilty for not observing what they promised: "A foolish and faithless promise displeases him" (Ec 5:3). 240. Then when he says, so, if a man who is uncircumcised (v. 26), he considers circumcision in relation to the Gentiles in two ways. First, from the aspect that the Gentiles obtain the benefits of circumcision by observing the Law. Hence he says: Since circumcision profits, if the Law is observed, but not, if it is not; then, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the law, i.e., the moral precepts of the Law: "All your commandments are true" (Ps 119:86), will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? As if to say: He will enjoy the fruit of true circumcision. For a man is circumcised outwardly in the flesh in order to circumcise himself in the heart: "Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, remove the foreskin of your hearts" (Jer 4:4). 241. Secondly, at then those who are physically uncircumcised, he shows that on account of observing the Law the Gentile is preferred to the Jew. Hence he says, Then those who are physically uncircumcised, but keep the law through natural reason will condemn you, the circumcised Jew, who have the written law but break it by transgressing the precepts of the written law and have circumcision, i.e., of the flesh. Hence on the basis of this comparison it is written in Mt (12:4): "The men of Nineveh will arise with this generation...and condemn it." 242. Then when he says For it is not the one who is so outwardly (v. 28) he assigns the reason for his statements. First, he gives the reason; 126 secondly, he proves it, there [v. 29b; n. 245] at His praise. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he assigns the reason why circumcision or Judaism without observance of the Law is fruitless; secondly, why observance of the Law without Judaism and circumcision has value, there [v. 29; n. 244] But he who is so in a hidden way. 243. He says, therefore, that circumcision in one who breaks the Law is uncircumcision and will be judged by the uncircumcised who obey the law, because he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly according to carnal birth: "Not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel..., but the children of the promise are reckoned as descendants" (Rom 9:6-9). Similarly, true circumcision is not that which appears in the flesh, for it is a sign: "It shall be a sign of the covenant between you and me" (Gen 17:11). But it is not a true sign, unless the reality signified corresponds to it. Hence, if a Jew transgressed the covenant, his circumcision would not be true; consequently, it would be regarded as uncircumcision. 244. Then when he says but he who is so in a hidden way (v. 29) he assigns the reason why the uncircumcision of one who keeps the Law is regarded as circumcision and will judge bodily circumcision. The reason is that he is truly a Jew who is one inwardly, i.e., whose heart is possessed by the precepts of the Law, which the Jews professed: "Your father who sees in secret will repay you" (Mt 6:6). Again, true circumcision is of the heart in the spirit, i.e., made by one’s spirit, which expels superfluous thoughts from the heart. Or in the spirit, i.e., effected by a 127 spiritual and not a literal understanding of the Law: "For we are the true circumcision who worship God in spirit" (Phil 3:3). 245. Then when he says His praise (v29b) he proves this reason. For it is obvious that in all matters the divine judgment must prevail over the human. Now things that appear outwardly, such as Judaism or circumcision, are praised by men, but things that exist within are judged according to God’s judgment, because "man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart" (1 Sam 16:7).

After showing that Judaism, which involved receiving the Law and circumcision, is not sufficient for salvation without the Law’s observance, through which the Gentile without external Judaism and circumcision obtains the fruit of each [n. 163 and 210], he now objects to his own doctrine: 129 first, he presents the objection; secondly, he answers it, there [v. 2; n. 248] at Much in every way. 247. First, he objects: If what I say is so, i.e., that the true Jew and true circumcision are not something outward but inward in the heart, then what advantage has the Jew, i.e., what has been given to him more than to others? It seems to be nothing. But this is not fitting, since the Lord had said: "The Lord, your God, has chosen you to be a people for his own possession" (Dt 7:6). Or what is the value of circumcision, i.e., outward? It seems from his previous teaching that there is no value. But this is not fitting, since it was imposed by God, Who says: "I am the Lord, your God, who teaches you unto profit" (Is 48:17). 248. Then when he says Much in every way (v. 2) he answers the objection: first, in regard to Judaism’s prerogative; secondly, in regard to the value of circumcision, in chapter 4, there [n. 322] at What therefore shall we say? In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows Judaism’s prerogative; secondly, he rejects their boasting over the Gentiles, there [v. 9; n. 271] at What then?. In regard to the first he does three things: first, he states his position; secondly, he explains it, there [v. 2b; n. 250] at First indeed; thirdly, he excludes an objection, there [v. 3; n. 251] at What if some. 130 249. First, therefore, he says: the question is raised what advantage has the Jew. The advantage is both quantitative, which is indicated when he says, much, and numerical, which is indicated when he says, in every way. For they have an advantage both in contemplating divine matters: "In Judah God is known" (Ps 76:1) and in the provision of temporal things: "He has not dealt thus with any other nation" (Ps 147:20). They have further advantages relating to their ancestors, to the promises and to their offspring: "They are Israelites, and to them belong the sonship, the glory, the covenant" (Rom 9:4). In each of these there is no small advantage, but great and important ones, which are summed up when he says, much. For man’s greatest good lies in knowing God, in clinging to God and in being instructed by God: "Blessed is the man whom thou dost teach out of thy law" (Ps 93:12). 250. Then when he says First indeed he explains his statement, saying: First indeed, i.e., the chief advantage is that to them are entrusted the oracles of God, being His friends: "I have called you friends" (Jn 15:15). This is important, because the oracles of God are trustworthy: "The ordinances of the Lord are true and righteous altogether" (Ps 19:9) and pleasant: "How sweet are thy words to my taste" (Ps 119:103) and useful for avoiding sin: "I have laid up thy word in my heart, that I may not sin against thee" (Ps 119:11). 251. Then when he says What if some were unfaithful (v.3) he excludes an objection: first, he presents it; 131 secondly, he rejects it by showing its consequences, there [v. 3b; n. 253] at Does their faithlessness; thirdly, by showing that the consequence is unfitting, there [v. 4b; n. 254] at But God is true. 252. Someone could belittle the Jews’ prerogative by citing their ingratitude, through which they would seem to have set aside the value of God’s message. Hence he says, what if some were unfaithful? Does this show that the Jew has no advantage, especially in the light of 2 Pt (2:21): "It would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandments delivered to them." For they did not believe the Lawgiver: "They had no faith in his promises" (Ps 106:24) or the prophets: "They are a rebellious house" (Ez 2:6) or the Son of God: "If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?" (Jn 8:46). 253. Then when he says Does their faithlessness (v3b) he excludes this objection by showing the unsuitable conclusion it engenders. For if the Jews’ prerogative were taken away on account of the unbelief of some, it would follow that man’s unbelief would nullify God’s faithfulness -- which is an unacceptable conclusion. This is what he says: Does their unfaithfulness, namely, of those who have not believed, nullify the faithfulness of God? This can be understood in two ways: in one way, as referring to the faith by which one believes in God. For the faith of believers is not nullified by those who have not believed, because the evil in some members of society does not nullify the good in other members: "Some of them he blessed and exalted and some of them he made holy and 132 brought near to himself; some he cursed and brought low, and he turned them out of their place" (Si 33:12). This is against those of whom Augustine says in The Letter to the People of Hippo: "What other motive inspires them and what else do they discuss save that when a bishop or cleric or monk or nun falls, they believe that all are such, but not all can be exposed?" In another way, it can be understood as referring to the faith with which God is faithful in keeping His promises: "He who promised is faithful" (Heb 10:23). This faithfulness would be nullified, if it happened that the Jews had no advantage, just because some have not believed. For God promised to multiply that people and make it great: "I will multiply your descendants" (Gen 22:l6). 254. Then when he says, Let it not be!, he shows that it is unfitting for God’s faithfulness to be nullified on account of men’s unbelief. First, he gives a reason for this; secondly, he cites a text, there [4b; n. 256] at As it is written; thirdly, be excludes a false understanding of this text, there [v. 5; n. 262] at But if our injustice. 255. The reason is based on the fact that God in Himself is true: "The Lord is the true God" (Jer 10:10); "This is the true God and life eternal" (1 Jn 5:20); though every man be false: "I said in my consternation, ‘Men are all a vain hope’" (Ps 116:11). Hence, it is plain that man’s mendacity or unbelief in not adhering to the truth does not nullify God’s truth or faithfulness. This is easier to understand, if we consider that truth implies agreement between thing and understanding. But things are in agreement with our understanding in one way 133 and with God’s in another way. For our intellect derives its knowledge from things; consequently, the cause and measure of our truth stems from the thing’s being. For an opinion is called true or false depending on whether the thing is as stated or is not. Hence, our understanding can be true or it can be false, for it can be in agreement or disagreement. But whatever is open to being or not being needs someone acting to make it be; otherwise, it continues not to be. For as air without something illuminating it remains dark, so our intellect by itself, unless it is enlightened by the first truth, continues in falseness. Hence, of himself every man is false in his intellect and is true only in virtue of participating in the divine truth: "Send out thy light and thy truth" (Ps 43:3). The divine intellect, on the other hand, is the cause and measure of things. For this reason it is of itself unfailingly true, and everything else is true inasmuch as it conforms to that intellect. Similarly, considering truth on the part of the thing, man of himself does not have truth, because his nature is convertible into nothing. Only the divine nature, which is not produced from nothing or convertible into nothing, has of itself truth. 256. Then when he says, As it is written, he proves his statement on the authority of a text in Ps 51 (v.4): That thou mayest be justified in thy words and prevail when thou art judged. How this is to the point can be gathered from considering what the Psalmist had said just ahead of it For he says just before this, "Against thee, thee only, have I sinned," and then: "So that thou art justified in thy sentence and blameless in thy judgment." For God through the prophet Nathan had promised David that He would establish his kingdom forever in his seed, as is gathered from 2 Sam (7:16). But later, when he fell into serious 134 sin, namely, adultery and murder (2 Sam 11:2 ff), some said that on account of these sins God would not keep the promises made to him. 257. Hence, the Psalmist’s intention bears on two things. First, that God’s justice, which involves keeping His promises, is not changed on account of sin. Touching on this he says, that thou mayest be justified in thy words, i.e., that You may be shown just in your words, since You do not disregard them because of my sins: "All the words of my mouth are righteous" (Pr 8:8); "The Lord is faithful in all his words" (Ps 145:13). Secondly, that God’s promise imitates men’s judgment. And this is what he says, and prevail, namely, by keeping Your promise, when thou art judged, namely, by men, that on account of my sins You did not keep Your promises: "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good" (Rom 12:21), which is said to men. Accordingly, it is truer of God. 258. It should be noted that God’s promise to David was to be fulfilled in Christ’s incarnation. Hence it was a predestinative prophecy, in which something is promised as destined to be fulfilled in every way; whereas something promised or foretold by a prophecy of warning is not predicted as destined to be fulfilled in every way but according to men’s merits, which can change. Therefore, if the promise made to David had not been fulfilled, it would have been prejudicial to God’s justice; whereas the non-fulfillment of a promise made through a prophecy of warning is not prejudicial to God’s justice, but indicates a change in deserts. Hence it is written in Jer (18:7): "If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a 135 kingdom that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, and if that nation turns from its evil, I will repent of the evil that I intended to do to it." Therefore, it is plain, according to this sense, that man’s sin does not exclude God’s faithfulness. 259. Other senses of this text are presented in the Gloss [of Lombard, col. 1352], but they are not closely related to the Apostle’s intention. The first is that these words are linked with the words, "Wash me more thoroughly from my iniquity" (v. 4) to the end "that you may be justified," i.e., appear just, "in thy words," in which You promised pardon to sinners not only in Ezekiel, because these words antedated that, but also in Lev (26:41): "If they make amends for their iniquity, then I will remember my covenant," and Dt (30:1): "If, lead by repentance of heart, you turn to God, the Lord your God will bring you back, and have compassion on you." Thus "may you prevail when you are judged" by men that you ought not pardon me. 260. Secondly these words are connected with the verse, "Against you only have I sinned," i.e., in comparison with you who alone are just. And this is what he means when he says "that you may be justified," i.e., by you may appear just in comparison to me and other sinners: "The Lord is just, and loves justice" (Ps 10:8), and this not only in deeds but also in your words, which is the greatest of all according to Jam 3(:2), "If anyone does not offend in word." "And that you may overcome when you are judged," i.e., when you are compared to anyone else in judgment: "Judge between me and my vineyard" (Is 5:3). 261. Third, these words are referred to Christ, Who alone is without sin: "He committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips" (2 Pt 2:22) and is, therefore, justified in 136 His words as compared to all men. And you prevail over sin, death and the devil: "The Lion of the tribe of Judah has conquered" (Rev 5:5), when you are judged unjustly by Pilate: "Thy cause has been judged as that of the wicked" (Jb 36:17). 262. Then when he says, But if our wickedness, he excludes a false understanding of the text he cited. For someone might understand these words according to the sense that "that" [ut] would be taken in a causal, not a consecutive, sense. Then it would follow that man’s sin would be directly ordained to commend God’s justice. But the Apostle shows that this is false. Hence he says that "that" is used consecutively, on the ground that David sinned and then the manifestation of divine justice followed, but not causally, as if a man’s sin commended God’s justice. He proves this by showing that it leads to something unfitting in two ways: first, on the part of divine judgment; secondly, on the part of human judgment [v. 7; n. 267]. In regard to the first he does three things: first, he presents the false sense; secondly, he shows that something unfitting follows from this, there [v. 5b; n. 264] at What then shall we say? Is God unjust; thirdly, he shows that it is unfitting, there [v. 6; n. 265] at Let it not be! 263. It should be noted that above (v.4) the Apostle had made two comparisons; in the first he compared divine truth to human falsity when he said: "Let God be true, though every man be false"; in the second, God’s justice to human sin, in the words of Ps 137 51 (v.4), where it is said: "Against thee, thee only, have I sinned.... That thou mayest be justified." In regard to the first comparison he says: If these words are taken to mean that our iniquity directly commends God’s justice, what shall we say? In other words, we could not accept the inconvenience that follows. For sin is not necessary for God to have His justice commended: "He does not desire a multitude of faithless and useless children" (Si 16:1). 264. He expresses the inconvenience that follows, when he says: Is God who inflicts wrath on us, i.e., vengeance for sin, unjust? For this follows from the supposition. For if sin were directly ordained to commending justice, it would not be deserving of punishment but of reward. Consequently, God would be unjust in punishing men for sin, contrary to what is stated in Dt (32:4): "God is faithful and without iniquity." 265. He rejects this inconvenience, when he says, Let it not be that is God unjust. I speak according to man, i.e., I say these words not from my understanding but from that of a man in error, as is stated in 1 Cor (3:3): "For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh?" 266. He shows that this must not be admitted, adding: For then, namely, if God is unjust, how could God judge the world, i.e., how could He be the universal and supreme judge of the world? For it is necessary that the first and highest item in every class be unerring, just as the first mover is unchangeable. Hence it is written in Ps 96 (v.13): "I will judge the world with righteousness." 138 A like argument is presented in Jb (34:12): "Of a truth God will not do wickedly, and the Almighty will not pervert justice. Who gave him charge over the earth and who laid on him the whole world?" In other words: If He were not to judge justly, it would be necessary to suppose that someone else is judge of the world. 267. Then when he says For if the truth (v.7) he shows the same on the part of human judgment. He does three things: first, he presents the false understanding of the above words; secondly, he shows the inconvenience that follows, there [v. 7b; n. 269] at Why am I sill; thirdly, he shows that it is inconvenient, there [v. 8b; n. 270] at Their condemnation. 268. He expresses the false understanding according to the comparison of divine truth to human falsity, when he says: But if through my falsehood, i.e., on account of my falsity, God’s truthfulness, being manifested, abounds to his glory, man’s falsity directly obtains an increase of glory. This is contrary to what is stated in Jb (13:7): "Does God need you to speak deceitfully for him?" 269. Then he adds two inconveniences that follow: one is that man should not be regarded a sinner for lying, on the ground that it is directly ordained to God’s glory. And this is what he says: Why am I still, i.e., even now, being condemned by men as a sinner for being false: "Whereas wickedness is fearful, it bears witness of its condemnation" (Wis 17:8), because sinners are condemned by the judgment of all. 139 The other inconvenience is that it lends support to the false accusation leveled against the apostles. For they preached that through the abounding grace of Christ the debt for an abundance of sins was paid, as is stated below: (5:20): "Where sin increased, grace abounded all the more." For this the apostles were blasphemed, as if preaching that men should do evil in order that good be obtained. This would follow, if man’s falsehood directly commended God’s grace and truth. Therefore, he says: and why not do evil by sinning and teaching falsehood, that good may come, i.e., that God’s truth and justice be commended, as some people slanderously charge us: "When slandered, we try to conciliate" (1 Cor 4:13) with saying by twisting our words: "Which the ignorant and unstable twit to their own destruction" (2 Pt 3:16). 270. He rejects these inconveniences when he says, Their condemnation is just, i.e., those who do evil that good may come. For just as it is not correct to deduce truth from falsity, so it is wrong to reach a good end through evil means: "Why does the way of the wicked prosper? Why do all who are treacherous thrive?" (Jer 12:1). Or their, namely, those who accuse us of this falsely, condemnation is just. For perverters of sacred doctrine are justly condemned: "If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book" (Rev 22:18).

271. After showing the Jews’ advantage over the Gentiles so far as God’s blessings are concerned [n. 248], the Apostle now rejects their vainglory, by which they preferred themselves to Gentiles converted to the faith. First, he states his point; secondly, be proves it, there [v. 9b; n. 274] at For we have charged. 272. First, therefore, he says: I have asked what advantage has the Jew. The first is that God’s words were delivered to them. What then shall we Jews say to converts to 141 the faith? Are we Jews any better off than Gentiles converted to the faith? For this was a matter discussed among them: "A dispute also rose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest" (Lk 23:24). He answers this when he says, No, not at all. 273. But this seems to be at variance with an earlier statement (v. 2), which said that their advantage was much in every way. The gloss [of Lombard, col. 1356] explains that in the first statement the Apostle was thinking of the Jews in the time of the Law, but now he is speaking of the time of grace because, as is written in Col (3:11): "In Christ there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised," since these make no difference so far as the state of grace is concerned. But this explanation does not seem to be altogether in keeping with the Apostle’s intention, because later he will show that even while they were under the Law, they were under the power of sin, just as the Gentiles were, and even more so: "This is Jerusalem; I have set her in the center of the nations, with countries round about her. And she has wickedly rebelled against my ordinances and become more wicked than these countries" (Ez 5:5). Hence, it seems that above he was showing the excellence of God’s blessings; consequently, he did not say that the Jew was more excellent, but that something greater had been conferred on the Jew. Here he is rejecting the notion that they are excellent persons, because in spite of receiving God’s blessings they did not use them properly. 274. Then when he says For we have charged (v. 9b) he establishes his points: first, that the Jews do not excel the Gentiles so far as the state of sin is concerned; 142 secondly, so far as the state of justice is concerned, there [v. 2; n. 299] at But now apart from the law. He establishes the first in two ways: first, from what has been stated above; secondly, from an authority, there [v. 10; n. 176] at As it is written. 275. First, therefore, he says: We have already charged, i.e., we have supported with reasons, that Jews and Greeks, i.e., Gentiles, are all under the power of sin: "From the sole of the foot even to the head there is no soundness in him" (Is 1:6). For he showed, first of all, that the Gentiles suppressed the truth they knew by their wickedness and unrighteousness; secondly, that the Jews, after receiving the Law, dishonored God by transgressing it. 276. Then when he says, As it is written, he establishes his point by the authority of the Psalmist: first, he quotes him; secondly, he explains, there [v. 19; n. 290] at Now we know. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions sins of omission; secondly, sins of commission, there [v. 13; n. 282] at Their throat. He touches on the sins of omission in two ways: first, by removing the sources of good works; secondly, by removing the good works themselves, there [v. 12; n. 280] at All have turned aside. 143 277. Now there are three sources or principles that make a work good: one of these pertains to the righteousness of the work, namely, justice, which he says is lacking: no one is just: "The godly man has perished from the earth; and there is none upright among men" (Mic 7:2). No one is just can be interpreted in three ways: in one way as meaning that no one is just within himself and of himself, but of himself everyone is a sinner and it is owing to God that he is righteous: "The Lord, a God merciful and gracious, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty" (Ex 34:6). In another way it means that no one is just in every way but has some sin according to Pr (20:9): "Who can say, ‘I have made my heart clean’?" and Ec (7:20): "Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins." In a third way it can be understood as referring to the wicked members of a populace, among which no one is just. For it is the custom of Scripture sometimes to speak of an entire populace in terms of its evil members and sometimes of its good members as in Jer (26:8 ff) where it is stated that when Jeremiah finished saying everything the Lord had commanded him to say to the entire populace, the priests and prophets and the entire people took hold of him and said that he would die the death. Then it is added: "Then the princes and all the people said to the priests and prophets: ‘This man does not deserve the sentence of death.’" (Jer 26:16). However, the first two meanings seem to be more in keeping with the Apostle’s intent; and the same must be said for the following. 144 278. The second element that makes a work good is intellectual discernment, whose absence is declared when he says, no one understands: "They have neither knowledge nor understanding" (Ps 82:5); "He would not understand" (Ps 36:3). 279. The third element is a right intention, whose absence is described when he says, no one seeks after God, namely, by directing his intention toward Him: "It is time to seek the Lord that he may come and rain salvation upon you" (Hos 10:12). 280. Then he removes the good works themselves. First, he cites offenses against the divine Law when he says, all have turned aside, namely, from regulation by divine Law: "They have all turned to their own way" (Is 56:11). Secondly, failure to pursue the end; hence he adds, together they have become unprofitable. For we call unprofitable whatever does not attain its end. Therefore, when men turn from God for Whom they were made, they are rendered unprofitable: "The brood of the ungodly will be of no use" (Wis 4:3). Thirdly, he excludes the good works themselves, when he adds, no one does good: "They are skilled in doing evil, but how to do good they know not" (Jer 4:22). 281. He adds, not even one. This can be taken exclusively, to mean: except the one who alone did good by redeeming the human race: "One man among a thousand I found, but a woman among all these I have not found" (Ec 7:28). Or it can be taken inclusively, to mean: there is not even one pure man doing good, i.e., what is perfect: "Search the squares [of Jerusalem] to see if you can find a man, one who does justice and seeks truth" (Jer 5:1). 282. Then when he says Their throats (v. 13) he mentions the sins of commission: 145 first, sins of speech; secondly, sinful deeds, there [v. 15; n. 287] at their feet are swift. The sins of the heart can be gathered from these. 283. In regard to sins of speech he mentions four things. First, readiness and foulness, when he says: their throat is an open grave. For an open grave has two features. For it is ready to receive the dead. According to this, a man’s throat is said to be an open grave, when it is prepared to utter deadly remarks in the manner described by Jer (5:16): "Their quiver is like an open tomb." Secondly, it exudes a foul odor: "You are like white-washed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness" (Mt 23:27). Therefore, a person from whose mouth proceeds the foul odor of filthy remarks has a throat which is an open grave: "Fire and smoke and sulphur issued from their mouths" (Rev 19:17). 284. Secondly, in regard to sins of speech, he touches on deception when he says, they use their tongues to deceive, having one thing in their heart and another in their words: "Their tongues is a deadly arrow; it speaks deceitfully" (Jer 9:8). 285. Thirdly, he mentions the havoc wrought by their words, when he says: The venom of asps is under their lips, because they utter words which kill their neighbor either spiritually or bodily: "Their wine is the poison of serpents and the cruel venom of asps" (Dt 32:33). 286. Fourthly, he designates the abundance of these sins when he says: Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness, because they have a plentiful supply of curses, for 146 they curse in slandering others, contrary to what he says below (12:14): "Bless and do not curse them". And bitterness, inasmuch as they do not hesitate to say insulting words to their neighbor’s face, being provoked by bitterness, contrary to what is written in Eph (4:31): "Let all bitterness be put away from you." 287. Then when he says their feet are swift (v.15) he touches on sinful deeds, in regard to which he mentions three things. First, readiness to do wickedly. Hence he says, Their feet are swift, i.e., their feelings, to shed blood, i.e., to commit any serious sin, because among the sins committed against our neighbor, murder is the most grievous: "Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed blood" (Pr 1:16). 288. Secondly, he touches on the number of injuries they inflict on others when he adds: in their paths, i.e., in their deeds, are ruin; because they crush others by oppressing them: "It is in his mind to destroy" (Is 10:7); and misery, inasmuch as they deprive men of their goods and reduce them to wretchedness: "They send men away naked, taking away their clothes" (Jb 24:7). Yet these two, ruin and misery, can be taken as designating the punishment rather than the sin. Then the sense is: In their paths are ruin and misery, i.e., their deeds, which are signified as paths, lead them to misery. In this case, ruin would refer to the oppressive punishment they suffer for their sins: "They shall be broken as a potter’s vessel" (Is 30:14) and misery, to the punishment of damnation, because they will be refused eternal happiness: "They are miserable, with their hopes set on dead things" (Wis 14:10). 147 289. Thirdly, he shows their persistence in evil, from which men are returned in two ways. In one way by a desire to be at peace with others. Against this he says, the way of peace they have not known, i.e., have not accepted: "Among those who hate peace I was peaceful" (Ps 120:6). In another way by the fear of God; but they neither fear God nor regard man (Lk 18:2). Hence he adds, there is no fear of God before their eyes, i.e., in their plans: "The fear of the Lord casts out sin; for without fear a person cannot be justified" (Si 1:27). This could also refer in a particular way to the Jews who did not believe Christ, i.e., that they have not known the way of peace, name1y, Christ, of Whom it is written: "He is our peace" (Eph 2:14). 290. Then when he says Now we know (v. 19) he explains the text he quoted in three ways: first, by expounding its sense; secondly, its intention, there [v. l9b; n. 294] at that every mouth; thirdly, he gives the reason for his words, there [v. 20; n. 295] at For by the works of the law. 291. It should be noted that the Jews, against whom the Apostle was speaking, could, to excuse themselves, pervert the sense of the text he cited and claim that it referred to the Gentiles, not to the Jews. But the Apostle rejects this, saying: Now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, i.e., to whom the Law is given and who profess 148 the Law: "When Moses commanded us a law" (Dt 33:4). But the Gentiles were not under the law; accordingly, the above words pertain to the Jews. 292. Two objections are raised here. The first is that the above words were not taken from the Law but from a psalm. The answer is that the word "Law" is sometimes taken for the entire Old Testament, not for the five books of Moses alone, as in Jn (15:25): "It is to fulfill the word that is written in their law, ‘They hated me without cause,’" which was written in the Old Testament, not in the five books of Moses. This is the way, "Law" is taken here. Again, the Old Testament is sometimes divided into three parts, namely, the Law, the psalms and the prophets, as in Lk (24:44): "That everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled." Finally, the entire Old Testament is sometimes divided into two, namely, the Law and the prophets, as in Mt (22:40): "On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets." In this sense the Psalter is included under the prophets. 293. The second objection is that in the Law, i.e., in the Old Testament, many things are said that pertain to other nations, as is clear in many passages of Isaiah and Jeremiah, where many statements are directed against Babylon and other nations. Therefore, not everything that the Law says speaks to those and about those who are under the Law. The answer is that whatever it says indeterminately seems to be directed to those to whom the Law has been given; but when the Scripture speaks of others it mentions them by name, as when it is written: "The burden of Babylon," "The burden of Tyre," etc. Furthermore, whatever was said against other nations in the Old Testament was 149 somehow directed to the Jews, inasmuch as ill fortune was foretold for their consolation or fear, just as any preacher should say what pertains to his audience, not what pertains to others: "Declare to my people their transgressions" (Is 58:1), as if to say: "not others’ transgressions." 294. Then when he says that every mouth (v. 19b) he states the intent of the text cited, for Sacred Scripture accuses all of injustice for two reasons. First, to suppress their boasting, by which they considered themselves just, as in Lk (18:12): "I fast twice a week." In regard to this he says, that every mouth may be stopped, which presumptuously ascribes justice to itself: "For the mouths of liars will be stopped" (Ps 63:11); "Talk no more so very proudly" (1 Sam 2:3). Secondly, so that recognizing their guilt, they might subject themselves to God as the sick to a physician. Hence he continues: and the whole world may be held accountable [made subject] to God, i.e., not only the Gentiles but the Jews also, after recognizing their guilt: "Shall not my soul be subject to God?" (Ps 62:1). 295. Then when he says For by the works of the law (v. 20) he assigns the reason for these words: first, he assigns the reason; secondly, he explains it, there [v. 20b; n. 298] at Since through the law. 296. First, therefore, he says: The reason no one is just is that no human being will be justified in his sight, i.e., according to His judgment, by works of the law; because, as is stated in Gal (2:2l): "If justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose," and in *** (3:5): "Not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy he saved us." 150 297. However, a work of the Law is of two kinds: one is peculiar to the Mosaic Law, as the observance of ceremonial precepts; the other is a work of the Law of nature, because it pertains to the natural law, as "Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal," etc. Now some take the Apostle’s words as referring to the first works, namely, that the ceremonials did not confer the grace through which men are made just. But this does not seem to be the Apostle’s intent, for he immediately adds: "since through the law comes knowledge of sin." But it is clear that sins are made known through prohibitions contained in the moral precepts. Consequently, the Apostle intends to say that by no works of the Law, even those commanded by the moral precepts, is man justified in the sense that justice would be caused in him by works, because, as he states below (11:6): "But if it is by grace it is no longer on the basis of works." 298. Then when he says, since through the law, he proves his statement, namely, that the works of the Law do not justify. For the Law is given that man might know what to do and what to avoid: "He has not dealt thus with any other nation; they do not know his ordinances" (Ps 147:20); "The commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light and the way of life" (Pr 6:23). But from the fact that man knows a sin he should avoid as being forbidden, it does not at once follow that he avoids it (because this pertains to the nature of righteousness), because concupiscence subverts the judgment of reason, when it bears on a particular moral action as performable. Consequently, the Law is not enough to make one just; another remedy is needed to suppress concupiscence.

299. After showing that Jews and gentiles are equal as far as the state of previous guilt is concerned [n. 274], the Apostle now shows that they are also equal as far as the state of subsequent grace is concerned. In regard to this he does three things: first, he states his teaching; secondly, he explains something he had presupposed, there [v. 29; n. 318] at Or is God the God of the Jews only?; thirdly, he answers an objection, there [v. 31; n. 321] at Do we therefore destroy the law? 152 In regard to the first he does three things: first, he states his teaching; secondly, he manifests it, there [v. 22c; n. 304] at There is no distinction; thirdly, he draws the intended conclusion, there [v. 27; n. 313] at Where therefore is your glorying? In regard to the first he does three things: first, he states the relation between justice and the law; secondly, he gives the cause of justice, there [v. 22; n. 302] at the justice of God; thirdly, he shows that such justice is available to all, there [v. 22b; n. 303] at in all. 300. First, he sets down a twofold comparison or relation of justice to the Law [n. 301]. The first is that it is not caused by the Law. This is what he says: It has been stated that in times past God’s justice could not exist in virtue of the works of the Law, either because the just one himself fulfills the promises about men’s justification: "For I tell you that Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God’s truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs" (Rom 15:8). Or, rather, God’s justice, by which a person is justified by God, of which it says below: "not knowing the justice of God" (Rom 10:3). This justice of God, I say, has been manifested now, i.e., in the time of grace, by the teachings of Christ, by his miracles, as well as by the evidence of the fact, inasmuch as it is evident that many have been divinely made just. And this apart from the Law, i.e., without the Law causing righteousness: "You are severed from Christ, you who had 153 been justified by the Law; you have fallen away from grace" (Gal 5:4); "Soon my salvation will come, and my justice will be revealed" (Is 56:1). 301. But lest anyone suppose that this justice is contrary to the Law, secondly, he sets down another relation of justice to the Law when he says: although the law and the prophets bear witness to it. The Law bears witness to Christ’s justice by foretelling and prefiguring it: "If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me" (Jn 5:46); and also by its effect, for, since it could not justify, it bore witness that justice was to be sought elsewhere. The prophets bore witness by foretelling it: "To him all the prophets bear witness" (Ac 10:43). 302. Then he assigns the cause of this justice, and says the justice of God through the faith of Christ Jesus, i.e., which he delivered: "Looking to Jesus the perfecter of our faith" (Heb 12:2); or which is held concerning Him: "Because if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved" (Rom 10:9). God’s justice is said to exist through faith in Christ Jesus, not as though by faith we merit being justified, as if faith exists from ourselves and through it we merit God’s justice, as the Pelagians assert; but because in the very justification, by which we are made just by God, the first motion of the mind toward God is through faith: "Whoever would draw near to God must believe" (Heb 11:6). Hence faith, as the first part of justice, is given to us by God: "By grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing; for it is the gift of God" (Eph 2:8). 154 But this faith, out of which justice exists, is not the unformed faith about which James 2(:26) says, "Faith without works is dead," but it is faith formed by charity, about which Gal 5(:6) says, "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith [working through love]," through which Christ dwells in us; "that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith" (Eph 3:17), which does not happen without charity: "He who abides in love abides in God and God in him" (1 Jn 4:16). This is the faith about which Acts 15(:9) says, "He cleansed their hearts by faith," a cleansing that does not occur without charity: "Love covers all offenses" (Pr 10:12). 303. And lest anyone suppose that only the Jews are made just through this faith, third, he shows that this justice is common, when he adds in all. In other words this justice is in the heart, not in fleshly observances, about which Hebrews 9(:10) says that carnal observances were directed to the justification of the flesh, being regulations for the body and imposed until the time of reformation. And over all, because it transcends human power and merit: "Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us" (2Cor 3:5). He adds, who believe in him, which refers to the living faith, by which man is justified, as has been said. 304. Then when he says for there is no distinction, he manifests what he had said: first, in regard to the common availability of justice; secondly, as to its cause, there [v. 24; n. 306] at justified by grace; thirdly, as to its manifestation, there [v. 25b; n. 310] at for the manifestation. 305. First, therefore, he says: It has been stated that the righteousness of God is in all and above all who believe in Christ. For in this matter there is no distinction between 155 Jew and Gentile: "In Christ Jesus there is not Gentile and Jew" (Col 3:11), namely [a Jew] who has some distinction, as though the Jew does not need to be made just by God as the Gentile does. Since all have sinned, as has been shown above: "All we like sheep have gone astray" (Is 53:6) and for this reason need the glory of God, i.e., the justification that redounds to God’s glory. Furthermore, man should not ascribe this glory to himself: "Not to us, O Lord, not to us, but to thy name give glory" (Ps 115:1); "Give glory to God" (Ps 66:2). 306. Consequently, because all have sinned and cannot of themselves be justified, they need some other cause to make them just. This cause he indicates when he continues, being justified. First [cf. n. 307], he shows that such justification exists without the Law, i.e., that it does not come from the works of the Law, when he says being justified freely [gratis], i.e., without the merit of previous works: "You were sold for nothing and you shall be redeemed without money" (Is 52:3). And this is by his grace, namely, God’s, to whom glory is due on this account: "By the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor 15:10). 307. Secondly, he shows what is the cause of justification. First [cf. n. 308ff.], he discloses the cause itself, when he says, through redemption. For as is stated in John 8(:34), "Everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin." From this slavery a man is redeemed, if he makes satisfaction for sin. For example, if a man owes a king a fine for some guilty action, the one who paid the fine would be said to have redeemed him from the debt. Now, this debt involved the whole human race, which was infected by the sin of the first parent. Hence no other person could satisfy for the sin of the entire human race except Christ alone, who was immune from all sin. 156 Hence he adds, which is in Christ Jesus. As if to say: in no other could there be redemption: "Not with perishable things, such as silver and gold" (1 Pt 1:18). 308. Secondly, he shows whence this redemption has efficacy, when he says whom God put forward as an expiation. For Christ’s satisfaction was efficacious for justifying and redeeming by the fact that God had assigned him to this in his plan, which he designates when he says whom God put forward as an expiation: "According to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will" (Eph 1:11). Or put forward, that is, he put [him] forward for all, because the human race had no way of making satisfaction unless God himself gave them a redeemer and satisfier: "He sent redemption to his people" (Ps 111:9). And so, while making satisfaction, he redeems us from the debt of sin and obtains pardon for our sins, which the Psalmist begged: "Be propitious to our sins" (Ps 79:9); and this is why he calls him a propitiation. Propitiation. As a figure of this it was commanded in Exodus (25:17) that a propitiatory [seat], i.e., Christ, be placed on the ark, i.e., the Church. 369. Thirdly, he indicates how the effect of redemption reached us, when he says, by faith in his blood, i.e., faith concerning his blood poured out for us. For in order to satisfy for us, it was fitting that he undergo the penalty of death for us, a penalty man had incurred by sin, as indicated in Genesis 2(:17), "In the day that you eat of it you shall die." Hence 1Peter 3(:18) states, "For Christ also died for sins once for all." This death of Christ is applied to us through faith, by which we believe that the world has been redeemed by His death: "I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me 157 and gave himself for me" (Gal 2:20). For even among men payment made by one man does not benefit another, unless [that other] considers it valid. And so it is clear how there is justification through faith in Jesus Christ, as has been stated above. 310. But because he had stated above [n. 300] that God’s justice is manifested now, he considers this manifestation [n. 311ff]. First, he touches on the manner of this manifestation, saying for the manifestation. As if to say: I say that we are justified by the redemption of Christ and by faith in his blood, for the manifestation of his justice, i.e., to the end that God might show his justice, and this because of the remission of former sins. For in remitting former sins, which the Law could not remit or men by their own power sufficiently guard against, God showed that the justice by which they are made just by God is necessary for men. But only through the blood of Christ could sins both present and past be remitted, because the power of Christ’s blood works through man’s faith, which the men who lived before his passion had, just as we have: "Since we have the same spirit of faith . . . we too believe" (2 Cor 14:13). Hence another way of reading it is: for the remission of the sins of those men who preceded the passion of Christ: "He will tread our iniquities under foot and he will cast all our sins into the depth of the sea" (Mic 7:19). 311. Secondly, he shows the time of its manifestation, when he adds: in the forbearance of God, for the manifestation of his justice in this time. As if to say: former sins before the passion of Christ were in the forbearance of God as, so to speak, under a certain divine support [sustinentia], because he neither damned believers and penitents 158 for them nor completely absolved them, in the sense that, the sins notwithstanding, they might enter into glory. Or, according to another reading, it can mean that the saintly fathers themselves were in God’s forbearance, because they were detained in limbo, not suffering sensible pain but waiting to enter into glory through the passion of Christ: "Wait for the forbearance of God" (Sir 2:3). For this purpose, I say, previous sins and the ancient fathers were in the forbearance of God, namely to for the manifestation of his justice in this time, i.e., that in this time of grace he might manifest his justice perfectly by granting full remission of sins: "Now is the acceptable time; now is the day of salvation" (2 Cor 6:2). And this is what he had said above, namely that God’s justice is now manifest. Up to this present time former sins had be in the forbearance of God, in order to convince man of his lack of knowledge, since in the time of the law of nature man fell into errors and base sins; and of his lack of power, since after the written law, which gave knowledge of sin, man still sinned through weakness. 312. Thirdly, he shows that by remitting sins God’s justice is shown, whether it be taken as the justice of God by which he himself is just or as the justice by which he justifies others. Hence he continues: that he himself may be just, i.e., that by remitting sins God may appear to be just in himself, both because he remitted sins as he had promised and because it belongs to God’s justice to destroy sins by leading men back to his justice: "The Lord is righteous, he loves righteous deeds" (Ps 11:7). 159 19 Cf. n. 274, 299, and 304. And also the justifier of him who is of the faith of Jesus Christ, i.e., who approaches God through faith in Jesus Christ: "Whoever would draw near to God must believe" (Heb 11:6).

After showing that Jews have no advantage over the Gentiles either in regard to sin or to righteousness,19 he now presents the intended conclusion, by rejecting the boasts whereby they preferred themselves to the Gentiles. He does three things. First, he proposes that this boasting be excluded; secondly, the reason for this exclusion, there [v. 27b; n. 315] at by what law?; thirdly, the way it is excluded, there [v. 28; n. 317] at For we judge. 160 20 RSV Ps 68:30. The Hebrew text of this verse is obscure. 314. In regard to the first he does two things. First, he raises a question: Inasmuch as you, 0 Jew, are under sin just as the Gentile, and the Gentile is made just by faith just as you are, then what becomes of your boasting, whereby you take glory in the Law, as stated above, and on this ground wish to prefer yourself to the Gentile? "Your boasting is not good" (1 Cor 5:6); "Let us have no self-conceit, envying one another," (Gal 5:26). Secondly, he answers this, saying, it is excluded, i.e., is taken away: "The glory has been taken away from Israel" (1 Sam 4:21); "I will change their glory into shame" (Hos 4:7). Or excluded, i.e., expressly manifested. For the Jews gloried in the glory and worship of the one God, and he says that their glory was excluded, i.e., pressed out [expressam] by Christ, as artists who press out an image in silver are called "excludors," in accord with Ps 67:31, "That they might exclude those who were tried by silver."20 But the first meaning is more literal. 315. Then when he says by what law, he states the cause of this exclusion. Since the Jews’ boasting was about the Law, as has been stated above, it seemed that their boasting had to be excluded by something of the same genre, i.e., by some law. Therefore, he asks on what is their boasting to be excluded? For someone might suppose that the Apostle means their boasting was excluded by certain legal precepts which commanded greater works. That is why he asks, on the principle of works? As if to say: Do I say that their boasting has been excluded by some law of works? But he answers: No, but by the law of faith. 161 So it is plain that the Apostle alludes here to two laws, that of works and that of faith. At first glance it would seem that by the law of works is meant the Old Law and by the law of faith the New Law, through which the Gentile is made equal to the Jew. 316. But there is some doubt about this distinction. For even in the Old Law faith was necessary, just as it is in the New: "You who fear the Lord believe him" (Sir 2:8); "I believed; therefore I have spoken" (Ps l16:l0). And indeed, works are required in the New Law, namely, the works of certain sacraments, as commanded in Luke 22(:19), "Do this in memory of me" and of moral observances: "Be doers of the word and not hearers only" (Jas 1:22). Consequently, it should be said that what he calls the law of works is the law outwardly presented and written, through which men’s external works are directed, when it prescribes what he ought to do and forbids what ought to be avoided. But what he calls the law of faith is the law inwardly written, through which are directed not only external works but even the very motions of the heart, among which the act of faith is first: "Man believes with his heart" (Rom 10:10). Of this second law he speaks below (8:2): "The law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus." 317. Then when he says, For we hold, he shows how the Jews’ boasting is excluded by the law of faith, saying: For we apostles, being taught the truth by Christ, hold that a man, whomsoever he be, whether Jew or Gentile, is justified by faith: "He cleansed their hearts by faith" (Ac 15:9). And this apart from the works of the law. Not only without the ceremonial works, which did not confer grace but only signified it, but also without the works of the moral precepts, as stated in Titus 3(:5), "Not because of deeds done by us in righteousness." This, of course, means without 162 works prior to becoming just, but not without works following it, because, as is stated in Jas (2:26): "Faith without works," i.e., subsequent works, "is dead," and, consequently, cannot justify. 318. Then when he says Or is God the God of the Jews only?, he manifests something he had presupposed, namely, that the righteousness of faith stands in the same common relation to all. He had previously explained this with a reason based on the material cause, when he stated above (v. 23) that "all have sinned and need the glory of God," i.e., they are sinners, who need to be made just by the grace of God. But a proof based solely on the material cause is not enough, because matter is not moved to a form by itself without an agent cause. Accordingly, he now presents a proof based on the agent cause, i.e., the justifier, who is God: "It is God who justifies" (Rom 8:33). Now it is manifest that our God by justifying saves those whose God he is, according to Ps 68(:20), "Our God is a God of salvation." But he is the God not of the Jews only but of the Gentiles also; therefore, he justifies both. 319. On this point he does three things. First, he raises a question concerning the Jews, when he says, Is God the God of Jews only? It might seem that he is, because it says in Exodus 5(:3), "The God of the Hebrews called us." Hence it must be said that he was the God of the Jews only by the special worship paid to God by them; hence it is stated in Ps 76 (v.1): "In Judah God is known"; yet he was the God of all by his common reign over all things, as is stated in Ps 47(:8), "God is king of all the earth." 163 Secondly, he raises the question on the side of the Gentiles, saying: Is he not God of the Gentiles also? and he answers: Yes, of Gentiles also, whom he governs and rules: "Who would not fear thee, O king of the nations?" (Jer 10:7). Thirdly, there at for God indeed is one, he manifests what he had said with a sign, as if to say: It is clear that he is the God not only of the Jews but also of the Gentiles, for God indeed is one and he will justify the circumcised, i.e., the Jews, from faith, as is said in Galatians 5(:6), "In Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail." 320. According to the Gloss, "from faith" [ex fide] and "by faith" [per fidem] are exactly the same. However, a slight difference can be noted. For the preposition "from" [ex] sometimes designates a remote cause, while the preposition "through" [per] designates a nearer cause. Therefore, the Jews are said to be justified "from" faith because faith was the first cause from which circumcision and the other sacraments of the Law proceeded; thus, faith justified the Jews as a primary cause through intermediate causes. But the Gentiles are justified by faith itself immediately. 321. Then when he says Do we therefore overthrow he excludes an objection. For someone might claim that he is overthrowing the aforementioned Law; therefore, he asks: Do we therefore overthrow the law by faith, inasmuch as we say that men are justified without the works of the Law? He answers: By no means! in keeping with Matt 5(:18), "Not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law." Rather, he adds: On the contrary, we uphold the law, i.e., by faith we complete and fulfill the Law, as Matt 5(:17) says, "I have come not to abolish the law but to fulfill it." 164 This is true as regards the ceremonial precepts because, being figures, they were upheld and fulfilled by the fact that the truth signified by them is shown forth in the faith of Christ. This is also true as regards the moral precepts, because the faith of Christ confers the help of grace to fulfill the moral precepts of the Law and even adds special counsels, through which the moral precepts are more safely and securely kept.

After excluding the glory which the Jews took in the Law, on the basis of which they preferred themselves to the Gentiles [n. 169 and 248], the Apostle now excludes their glory in regard to circumcision. About which he does two things. First, he takes up the question he had raised earlier [n. 247], when he asked: "What is the usefulness of circumcision?" And because Abraham was the first to receive the command about circumcision, as stated in Genesis 17(:10), he repeats the question in the person of Abraham himself, saying: If it is true that God justifies the uncircumcised as well as the circumcised, What usefulness then shall we say Abraham to have found, who is our father according to the flesh? That is, according to circumcision and other bodily observances. For it does not seem fitting to say that he found no usefulness, since it is stated in Isaiah 48(:17), "I am the Lord, your God, who teaches you useful things." 323. Secondly, when he says, For if Abraham, he answers the question he had raised. He does two things. First, he shows that Abraham did not obtain justification through circumcision and the other works of the Law, but rather through faith; secondly, he commends his faith, there [v.18; n. 367] at who against hope. In regard to the first he does two things. First, he explains his position with a reason based on divine acceptance; secondly, by reason of God’s promise, there [v. 13; n. 351] at For not through the Law. In regard to the first he does three things. 167 First, he proposes a conditional statement; secondly, disproves the consequent, there [v.3; n. 326] at For what do the Scriptures say?; thirdly, he proves the conditional statement, there [v. 6; n. 332] at As David also. 324. In regard to the first the Apostle intends to argue in the following manner: If Abraham were justified from works of the Law, he would have no glory with God; therefore, he was not justified from works. Hence, he presents the conditional [statement, saying]: It has been asked what Abraham found in virtue of bodily circumcision, and it is obvious that he did not find himself justified from works of the law, such that his justice consisted in the works of the Law. For he has glory, namely, before men, who see the outward works, but not before God, who sees in secret: "The Lord looks on the heart" (1 Sam l6:7); "So let no one boast of men" (1 Cor 3:21). Hence it is written against some that "they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God" (John l2:43). 325. Against this one might object that becoming accustomed to outward works generates an inward habit, according to which a man’s heart is also well disposed and so made ready to perform well and take pleasure in good works, as the Philosopher teaches in Ethics II. The answer is that this takes place in human justice, through which man is ordained to the human good. For the habit of this justice can be acquired through human works, but the justice which obtains glory before God is ordained to the divine good, namely future glory, which exceeds human ability, as is stated in 1 Cor 2(:9), "It has not arisen in the heart of man what God has prepared for those who love him." 168 Consequently, a man’s works are not proportioned to causing the habit of this justice; rather, a man’s heart needs first to be justified inwardly by God, so that he can perform works proportioned to divine glory. 326. Then when he says For what do the Scriptures say, he disproves the consequent, which was negative, by proving the opposite affirmative, namely, that Abraham did have glory before God. He proves this on the authority of Scripture: first, he cites the authority; secondly, he explains, there [v. 4; n. 328] at Now, to him. 327. First, therefore, he says: I say that Abraham was justified in a way that gave him glory before God. For what do the Scriptures say (Gen 15:6): Abraham believed God who promised that his seed would be multiplied. "Believe God and he will help you" (Sir 2:6). And it was reputed to him, i.e., by God, as justice: "Was not Abraham found faithful when tested?" (1 Macc 2:52). Consequently, it is clear that before God, by whom that he believed was reckoned to him as justice, he has glory. But it should be noted that Abraham expressed the justice described, which God regards, not in some outward work but in the inward faith of the heart, which God alone sees. Indeed, since the act of faith is said to be threefold, namely, to believe God [Deum], to believe God [Deo] and to believe unto God [in Deum], he mentions this act, namely to believe God [Deo], which is the proper act of faith and indicates its nature [species]. For to believe unto God shows the ordering of faith to its end, which is through charity; for to believe unto God is to go to God by believing, which charity does. Consequently, it follows upon the nature of faith. 169 But to believe God [Deum] indicates the matter of faith taken as a theological virtue, having God for its object. Consequently, this act does not yet attain the nature of faith, because if one believes in God in virtue of certain human reasons and natural signs, he is not yet said to have the faith of which we now speak, but only when he believes something for the reason that it was said by God—which is indicated by the phrase, "to believe God [Deo]." It is from this that faith takes its nature [specificatur], just as any cognitive habit takes its nature from the reason in virtue of which it assents to something. For a person possessing scientific philosophical knowledge is inclined to assent to its statements for one reason, namely, through demonstration, but one having the habit of opinion is inclined to assent for a different reason, namely, through a dialectical syllogism. 328. Then, when he says Now, to him who works, he explains the aforementioned biblical citation as regards the words it was reputed to him as justice. Two explanations of these words are given in the Gloss. In the first explanation they are linked to the final reward, concerning which first, he shows how it is related to works; secondly, how it is related to faith, there [v. 5; n. 330] at But to him who does not work. 329. First, therefore, he says that to him who works the works of justice, the reward of eternal recompense—concerning which Isaiah 40(:10) says, "Behold his reward is with him"—are not reckoned as a gift [secundum gratiam] only but as his due: "Did you not agree with me for a denarius?" (Mt 20:2). 170 But on the contrary it is stated below (6:23), "The free gift [gratia] of God is eternal life," and again: "The sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us" (Rom 8:18). Therefore, that reward is not made as due, but as a gift. The answer is that human works can be considered in two ways. In one way, according to the substance of the works, and considered this way they do not have anything deserving [condignum] that the award of eternal glory should be given. In another way, they can be considered according to their source, namely, insofar as they are performed under God’s impulse in accord with the intention of God who predestines. And in this respect the aforesaid reward is due them by debt, because, as is stated below (8:14): "All who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God"; "and if sons, then heirs" (8:17). 330. Then (v. 5) he shows how the eternal award is related to faith, saying, but to one who does not work outward works, for example, because he does not have time to work, as in the case of one who dies immediately after baptism, but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, namely, in God, of whom he says below (8:33): "It is God who justifies," his faith is reckoned, i.e., faith alone without outward works, as righteousness, so that in virtue of it he is called just and receives the reward of justice, just as if he had done the works of justice, as he says below (10:10): "Man believes with his heart and so is justified," according the purpose of the grace of God, i.e., accordingly as God proposes to save men gratuitously: "Who are called according to his purpose (Rom 8:28); "He accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will" (Eph 1:11). 331. Another explanation refers those words to man’s justification. 171 Then to the one who works, i.e., if anyone be justified by works, the justice would be reckoned not as a gift but as his due: "If it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace" (Rom 11:6). But to him who does not work, so as to be justified by his works, but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith will be reckoned as justice according to the purpose of God’s grace, not that he merits justice through faith, but because the believing itself is the first act of the justice God works in him. For from the fact that he believes in God justifying, he submits himself to his justification and thus receives its effect. This is the literal explanation and accords with the intention of the Apostle, who lays special stress on the words, "it was reckoned to him as righteousness (Gen 15:6)" a saying which is used when that which is lacking on someone’s part is reckoned to him gratis, as if he had accomplished the whole. That is why the Apostle says that such reckoning would have no place, if righteousness were from works, but only as it is from faith. 332. Then when he says As also David (v. 6) he proves the conditional statement by a quotation from a psalm. First, he gives its sense; secondly, he presents its words, there [v. 7; n. 334] at Blessed they whose; thirdly, he excludes a false interpretation, there [v. 9; n. 339] at So does this blessedness? 333. He says: So also David pronounces a blessing [happiness] upon the man to whom God reckons, i.e., confers, justice apart from works, i.e., gratis, without preceding works: "Not because of deeds done by us in righteousness" (Titus 3:5). 172 But man’s happiness is from God, as Ps 40 (v.5) says: "Blessed is the man who makes the Lord his hope." Hence, it is plain that he has glory before God who is justified not by the works of the Law, as has been said. 334. Then when he says Blessed they (v. 7) he presents David’s words containing the previous judgment and says that those whose sins are forgiven are blessed; consequently, they did not previously have good works, from which they obtained righteousness or happiness. 335. But sin is divided into three classes: original, actual mortal and actual venial. First, in regard to original sin he says: Blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven. Here it should be noted that original sin is called iniquity, because it is the lack of that original justice, by which in equity man’s reason was subject to God, the lower powers to reason, and the body to the soul. This equity is removed by original sin, because after reason ceased to be subject to God, the lower powers rebel against reason and the body is withdrawn from obedience to the soul and subjected to decay and death. Hence Ps 51 (v.5) says: "I was brought forth in iniquities." In both texts original sin is presented in the plural, either because of the multitude of men in whom original sin is multiplied or better because it virtually contains within itself all sins in some way. Such original sin is said to be forgiven, because the reatus passes with the coming of grace, but the effect remains in the form of fomes or concupiscence, which is not entirely taken away in this life, but is remitted or mitigated. 336. Secondly, in regard to actual mortal sin he says, and whose sins are covered. 173 For sins are said to be covered from the divine gaze, inasmuch as he does not look upon them to be punished: "Thou didst cover all their sin" (Ps 85:2). 337. Thirdly, in regard to venial sin he says, blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not reckon his sin, where sin refers to venial sins which, although light, if they be many, man is separated and distant from God: "The good Lord will pardon everyone who sets his heart to seek God, even though not according to the sanctuary’s rules of cleanness" (2 Ch 30:18). 338. These three can be distinguished in another way. For in sin are three things, one of which is offense against God. In regard to this he says, blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven, the way man is said to remit an offense committed against him: "Her iniquity is pardoned" (Is 40:2). The second thing is the fact that the disordered deed has been done and cannot be said not to have occurred, once it has been perpetrated; but it is covered over by the hand of God’s mercy and is held as if not committed. The third is the debt of punishment, in regard to which he says: Blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not reckon his sin, i.e., to punish. 339. Then when he says So does this blessedness (v. 9) he excludes a false interpretation of the text. For a Jew could interpret it as meaning that the grace of forgiveness of sins is conferred only on the circumcised. Therefore, to exclude this the Apostle first raises the question, Is this blessing by which God confers righteousness without works, pronounced only upon the circumcised, i.e., affects only the circumcised, or also upon the uncircumcised, i.e. on the Gentiles? 174 Plainly it is for both, according to what he says below (10:12): "The same Lord bestows his riches upon all who call upon him." Secondly, there at For we say, to show this he appeals to the authority of Scripture (Gen 15:6), as if to say: I ask this, because we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness. Thirdly, from this text he concludes to the answer, although he states it in the form of a question: How then was it reckoned to him, namely, Abraham’s faith as justice, i.e., was it before, i.e., when still uncircumcised, or after he had been circumcised? He answers: It was not after, but before he was circumcised. This is obvious from the reported sequence of events. For Gen (15:6) reports that faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness, but the fact of receiving circumcision is not recorded until Gen (17:23 ff). Therefore, if Abraham, still uncircumcised, was justified by faith, it is plain that the justice of faith, through which sins are forgiven gratis, occurs not only in circumcision but also in uncircumcision, i.e., in Gentiles.

Having showed that the blessing of forgiveness of sins is obtained not only in circumcision but also in uncircumcision on the ground that Abraham was justified when he was still uncircumcised [n. 339], the Apostle now responds to an objection. For someone could say: If Abraham was justified before circumcision, then he was circumcised without reason and for no purpose. To exclude this objection, he first states that circumcision was not the cause but the sign of righteousness; secondly, he shows what he obtains from this sign, there [v. 11b; n. 344] at that he might be the father; thirdly, how he obtains it, there [v. 12b; n. 345] at who are not merely. 342. In regard to the first he does two things. First, he states that circumcision is a sign: "You shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin and it shall be a sign of the covenant between you and me" (Gen 17:10). Secondly, he shows what it is a sign of, saying: a seal of the justice of faith, i.e., the justice that comes through faith, which faith is in uncircumcision, i.e., which Abraham had while he was still uncircumcised. 176 21 Aquinas elucidates the meaning of signaculum, which can mean the signet impressing a seal, by pointing to a sigillo, the seal impressed by a signet. As in Latin, however, but the signet and the impression made by the signet can be called the "seal." This makes translation difficult. 343. "Seal" is said in two ways. In one way, a seal [or signet] is a visible sign possessing a likeness to the thing signified, as in Ez (28:12): "You were the signet of perfection, full of wisdom." Circumcision had this visible likeness to Abraham’s faith. First, in regard to what he believed. For Abraham believed that his seed would be multiplied; hence, it was fitting to receive its sign in the organ of reproduction. Secondly, in regard to the effect of his faith, namely, the removal of fault, and this is signified by the removal of superfluous skin. In another way, "seal" [signaculum] means a sign hiding something which is to be revealed to friends, as is clear in the case of a sigillo:21 "Worthy art thou, who wast slain, to take the scroll and to open its seals" (Rev 6:9). Hence, the secret of the incarnation of Christ from the seed of Abraham was enclosed under the seal of circumcision. 344. Then he shows what follows from what has been said. For Abraham, still uncircumcised, was justified by faith and later received circumcision. From this he obtains the honor of being the father not only of the circumcised but also of uncircumcised believers. And this is what he says: The purpose was to make him father, i.e., from the foregoing it comes about that Abraham is the father, of all who believe without being circumcised, i.e., who are in the state of uncircumcision. Or Abraham is the father through uncircumcision, i.e., in virtue of what he had in uncircumcision, namely, that it be reckoned to them also as righteousness, namely, the fact that they believe, just as it was reckoned to Abraham. The power of this fatherhood is indicated in Mt (3:9): "God is able from these stones to raise up children to 177 Abraham." And likewise the father of the circumcised, who derive their origin from him: "Abraham is our father" (Jn 8:39). 345. Then he shows the manner in which he is the father even of the uncircumcised, namely, by imitation. And this is what he says: That he might be the father not merely of the circumcised but also of those who follow the example of the faith which our father Abraham had before he was circumcised, i.e., which Abraham had, while he was still uncircumcised: "If you were Abraham’s children, you would do what Abraham did" (Jn 8:39). 346. Since we are speaking of circumcision, it is fitting to consider three things about it, namely, why it was instituted [n. 347], what power it had [n. 349] and why it was changed [n. 350]. 347. In regard to the first it should be noted that circumcision, just as the other ceremonies of the Law, was instituted for two purposes. First, for divine worship, for which men were disposed in accordance with these ceremonies. In keeping with this, circumcision had three reasons for being instituted, the first of which was to signify the faith and obedience by which Abraham submitted to God, so that those who accepted the circumcision of Abraham should observe his faith and obedience. For it is stated in Heb 11: "By faith Abraham was circumcised." Hence, circumcision was instituted to signify his faith in future descendants, as has been stated. The second reason was to express in a bodily sign something that was to occur spiritually, namely, just as superfluous skin was removed from the organ of reproduction, which is the chief servant of concupiscence, so every superfluous desire should be 178 removed from man’s heart, as Jer (4:4) says: "Circumcise yourself to the Lord, remove the foreskin of your hearts." The third reason was to distinguish the people worshiping God from all other people. This is why God commanded circumcision for the children of Israel, who were to dwell among the other nations after first living alone and uncircumcised in the desert. 348. The other purpose of circumcision and all the ceremonies is based on a relation to Christ, to whom they are compared as the figure to the reality and as the members to the body: "These are only a shadow of what is to come, but the body belongs to Christ" (Col 2:17). Accordingly, by bodily circumcision is signified the spiritual circumcision to be accomplished by Christ: first in the soul, inasmuch as it is through him that concupiscence and the effects [reatus] of sin are removed by Christ: "In him," namely, Christ, "also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ" (Col 2:11). Secondly, in regard to the body, namely, when in the resurrection all possibility of suffering and death is removed from the bodies of the elect. Hence, circumcision took place on the eighth day, because it signified the eighth era. For the seventh is the era of those who are at rest in Christ, while the other six are the eras during which the world runs its course. Again, circumcision was done with knives of stone (Jos 5:2) to signify that spiritual circumcision was to be effected by the Rock, who is Christ, as stated in 1 Cor (10:4). However, it was not the general practice to use a knife made of stone. 349. In regard to the second question, namely, what power circumcision had, it should be noted that, as the Gloss [of Lombard, col. 1372] says here—the quotation is 179 taken from Bede—"During the Law, circumcision offered the same curative help against the wound of original sin as baptism is wont to give in the era of revealed grace." This shows that the power of circumcision extended to the removal of original sin. However, some say that grace was not conferred in circumcision; for without righteousness God’s grace cannot be present. But the Apostle says in Gal (2:21): "If justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose." And we can argue in the same way: If justifying grace were through circumcision, Christ died to no purpose. But this cannot be, for sin is never forgiven without grace: "Justified by his grace we have peace with God (Rom 5:1). Therefore, others say that grace was conferred in circumcision to produce privative effects, namely, to remove guilt, but not positive effects, namely, the work of righteousness. But this does not seem fitting either, for the positive effects of any form precede in the order of nature the privative effects; for example, light does not expel darkness except by illuminating. Similarly, grace expels guilt by producing righteousness. But if the prior is removed, the subsequent is removed. Therefore, it is better to say that ex opere operato circumcision did not have effective power either to remove guilt or to produce righteousness. It was merely a sign of righteousness, as the Apostle says here. But through faith in Christ, of which circumcision was a sign, it removed original sin and conferred the help of grace to act righteously. 350. In regard to the third question, it is clear from what has been said, why circumcision had to be changed. For it was a sign of something to come. But the same 180 sign does not suit the present, past and future. Therefore, baptism, as the sign of present grace, produces a more copious and more beneficial effect of grace, because the closer the agent is in time and place, the more effectively it works. 351. Then [n. 323] when he says, For not through the law, he explains his statement that circumcision or any work of the Law did not justify in virtue of a divine promise. In regard to this he does two things: first, he states his proposition; secondly, he proves it, there [v. 14; n. 354] at If it is the adherents of the law. 352. First, therefore, the Apostle accepts on the authority of Genesis the promise made to Abraham and his seed that they should inherit the world, i.e., that all the nations of the world would be blessed in him: "By you all the families of the earth shall be blessed" (Gen 12:3). He says, and to his seed, because even though this promise was not to be fulfilled in him, it was to be fulfilled in his descendants: "By your seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed" (Gen 23:18). But this seed is principally understood as Christ: "Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his seed. It does not say, ‘and to seeds,’ referring to many, but referring to one" (Gal 3:16), because in the one in whom it is to be fulfilled Ps 2 (v.8) it is shown that he would inherit the world: "Ask of me and I will make the nations your heritage." Secondarily, it is fulfilled in those who through Christ’s grace are spiritually the seed of Abraham: "The children of the promise are reckoned as descendants" (Rom 181 9:8). Through Christ they inherit the world, inasmuch as all things are for the glory of the elect: "All are yours and you are Christ’s" (1 Cor 3:22). 353. In regard to this promise he denies one thing and asserts another. He denies that such a promise came through the law. This is not said on account of the promise itself, because at the time of the promise the Law had not been given, but in reference to the fulfillment of the promise, so that the sense is that such a promise was not made to Abraham as something to be fulfilled through the Law, because, as it says in Heb (7:19): "The law made nothing perfect." What he asserts is that such a promise was to be fulfilled through the righteousness of faith, because "the saints through faith conquered kingdoms" (Heb 11:33). 354. Then when he says If it is (v.14) he proves his statement: first, in regard to the denial that the promise is to be fulfilled through, the Law; secondly, in regard to the assertion that it is to be fulfilled through the righteousness of faith, there [v. 16; n. 359] at Therefore it is of faith. In regard to the first he presents this argument: If the promise made to Abraham were to be fulfilled through the Law, Abraham’s faith believing the promise would be null, because the promise made to him would be abolished. But this is not fitting. Therefore, the first. In regard to this he does two things: first he presents a conditional statement; secondly, he proves it, there [v. 15; n. 356] at For the law. The destruction of the consequent is manifest. 182 355. He says first, therefore, that the promise was not made through the Law. For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, i.e., if, in order to share in the promised inheritance, it is required that one obtain this from observing the Law, faith is null, i.e., the faith by which Abraham believed God promising Gen (c. 15) as been made futile. But this is not in keeping with what has been stated in 1 Cor (15:17): "If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins." Why it is futile is shown when he adds, and the promise is abolished, i.e., emptied, because it does not produce its effect. But this is contrary to what is stated in Heb (11:11): "She considered him faithful who had promised" and to what is stated in this chapter (v.21): "Fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised." 356. Then when he says For the law (v. 15) he proves the conditional statement through the effect or result of the Law. First, he proposes the effect or result of the Law; secondly, he proves it, there [v. 15b; n. 358] at For where there is no law. 357. He proves the conditional thus: If a promise is to be fulfilled through something which prevents its fulfillment, such a promise is void and the faith of believers futile. But the Law prevents one from obtaining the inheritance, for the law brings wrath; therefore, if the promise is to be fulfilled through the Law, faith is null and the promise is void. Now the Law is said to bring wrath, i.e., vengeance, because through the Law men were made deserving of God’s vengeance: "Great is the wrath of the Lord that is kindled against us, because our fathers have not obeyed the words of this book," i.e., of the Law (2 Kg 22:13). 183 But someone might suppose that the Law brings wrath as far as legal ceremonies observed in the era of grace are concerned, in line with Gal (5:2): "If you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you." However, what is stated here refers even to moral precepts, not because they command something which makes its observers deserving of God’s wrath, but because the Law commands and does not confer the grace to fulfill, according to 2 Cor (3:6): "The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life," namely, because "the Spirit helps us inwardly in our weakness" (Rom 8:26). 358. Then when he says For where there is no law (v.15b) he shows how it brings wrath, saying: But where there is no law, there is no transgression, because even though a person, with no law given, could sin by commission against what is naturally just, he is not called a transgressor, unless he violates a law: "I looked at the transgressors with disgust, because they did not keep thy commands" (Ps 119:158). Yet every sinner can be called a transgressor, inasmuch as he transgresses the natural law: "I have accounted all the sinners of the earth transgressors" (Ps 119:119). However, it is more grievous to transgress at once the law of nature and the written law than the law of nature alone. Hence, the Law having been given without the help of grace, transgression increased and deserved greater wrath.

After showing that the promise made to Abraham and his seed was not to be fulfilled through the Law [n. 354], the Apostle now shows that it is to be fulfilled through faith. In regard to this he does three things: first, he shows through what such a promise is to be fulfilled; secondly, in whom it is to be fulfilled, there [v. 16b; n. 361] at to all the seed; 185 thirdly, by whom it is to be fulfilled, there [v. 17b; n. 364] at who gives life to the dead. 360. First, therefore, he concludes to his proposition, as it were by division. For it seems necessary that the promise be fulfilled either by faith or by the Law; but not by the Law, because the promise would be abolished. Hence, he concludes, that is why it depends on faith, if we are to attain the promise of being heirs of the world: "This is the victory that overcomes the world, our faith" (1 Jn 5:4). Then he confirms this with a middle term contrary to the one he used above. For it was stated that if justice were from the Law, the promise would be abolished; but if it be from faith, the promise remains solid in virtue of the power of divine grace justifying man through faith. And that is what he says, in order that the promise may be guaranteed and rest not on actions, which can fall short, but on grace, which is infallible: "My grace is sufficient for you" (2 Cor 12:9); "For all the promises of God find their Yes in him," namely, Christ, i.e., they are true (2 Cor 1:20). 361. Then when he says to all the seed (v.16b) he shows in whom this promise is fulfilled. First, he proposes what he intends and says that this promise, which is to be thus fulfilled through faith, is guaranteed by grace to all the seed, i.e., to every man who would be in any way descended from Abraham: "Their prosperity will remain with their descendants, and their inheritance to their children’s children" (Si 44:11). 362. Secondly, at not only, he explains what be meant by all the seed. For there is a bodily descendant, as is referred to in Jn (8:33): "We are the descendants of Abraham," and there is a spiritual descendant, as is referred to in Mt (3:9): 186 "God is able from these stones," i.e., from the Gentiles, "to raise up children to Abraham." Only the bodily descendants of Abraham kept the Law, but the spiritual descendants also imitate his faith. Thus, if the promise were solely through the Law, it would be fulfilled not in all the descendants but only in the bodily ones. But because it is fulfilled through faith, which is common to all, it is plain that it is fulfilled in all his descendants. 363. Thirdly, at he is the father, he proves something he had presupposed, namely, that the descendants of Abraham are not only the children of the Law but also the children of faith. He proves this with a text from Scripture. First, he gives its sense, saying, he, name1y, Abraham, is the father of us all, i.e., of all believers, Jew or Gentile: "The purpose was to make him father of all who believe" (Rom 4:11); "Look to Abraham, your father" (Is 51:2). Secondly, he cites the text, saying, as it is written (Gen 17:4), ‘I have made you the father of many nations,’ Another version has, I have appointed you. But it does not change the sense. "Abraham was the great father of a multitude of nations" (Si 44:19). Thirdly, at in the presence of God, he explains what he had said. For "I have made you" seems to imply that something destined to be fulfilled in the distant future had already come to pass. However, things that are future in themselves are present in God’s providence: "Before the universe was created, it was known to him; so it was also after it was finished" (Si 23:20). Accordingly, the Apostle says that the statement, I have made you, should be understood in the presence of God, i.e., in his presence in whom he believed. For Abraham had believed God promising things to come as if he saw them 187 present, because, as is stated in Heb (11:1); "Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." 364. Then when he says who gives life to the dead (v. 17b) he shows by whom this promise is to be fulfilled, saying, who, namely, God, gives life to the dead, i.e., the Jews, who were dead in sin for acting against the Law; he vivifies with faith and grace to enable them to rea1ize the promise to Abraham: "As the father raises the dead and gives them life so the Son gives life to whom he will" (Jn 5:21). And calls the things that are not, i.e., he calls the Gentiles to grace as those that are, i.e., as the Jews: "Those who were not my people I will call ‘my people’" (Rom 9:25). He refers to the Gentiles as those that are not, because they were completely estranged from God, and it is stated in 1 Cor (13:2): "If I do not have charity, I am nothing." Consequently, through this call the promise to Abraham is fulfilled even in the Gentiles. 365. Or he calls those that are not refers not to one’s temporal calling but to the call of eternal predestination, because even those who are not, are called and chosen as if they were: "He chose us in him before the foundation of the world" (Eph 1:4). Concerning this call it is stated below (9:11): "Not because of works but because of his call she was told, ‘The elder will serve the younger.’" Or he is calling God’s simple knowledge a call, or the knowledge by which he knows the future as present. This is the way it is taken in Ps 147 (v.4): "He calls the stars by their names." According to this sense, what is said here is mentioned on account of an earlier statement (v.17): in the presence of God in whom he believed. 188 Two things seem to militate against what was said: I have made you the father of many nations. One of these was that Abraham was as good as dead from old age. Against this he says, who gives life to the dead. The other is that those many nations did not exist yet. Against this he says: He calls into existence the things that do not exist. 367. Then [v.18; cf. n. 323] he commends Abraham’s faith. First, he shows the greatness of his faith; secondly, its efficacy or fruit, there [v. 22; n. 377] at This is why it was reckoned. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows the greatness of Abraham’s faith as far as the promise of multiplying his descendants is concerned; secondly, in regard to the promise to exalt his descendants, there [v. 20; n. 374] at No distrust made him waver. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows that his faith was great; secondly, that it was solid, there [v. 19; n. 370] at He was not weak in faith. 368. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions the greatness of Abraham’s faith, saying, In hope he, namely, Abraham, believed that he should become the father of many nations, but against another hope. Here it should be noted that hope implies a certain expectation of a future good, the certainty being based sometimes on a human or natural cause as in 1 Cor (9:10): "The plowman should plow in hope," or on a divine cause as in Ps 31 (v.1): "In thee, 0 Lord, have I hoped." 189 Therefore, in regard to this good of becoming the father of many nations Abraham had certainty on the part of God promising, but the contrary appeared on the part of natural or human causes. Hence, he says, against the hope of natural and human causes he believed in hope of the divine promise. 369. Secondly, this promise is set out when he says, as he had been told, namely, in Gen (22:17): So shall your descendants be as the stars of heaven and as the sand on the seashore. Both of these are mentioned, because they suggest an uncountable multitude. For as to the stars it is stated in Dt (1:10): "The Lord your God has multiplied you, and you are this day as the stars of heaven for multitude"; as to the grains of sand it is stated in 1kg (4:20): "Judah and Israel were as many as the sand by the sea." Yet a difference between the two can be noted, if the just, who were of Abraham’s seed, be compared to the stars: "Those who turn many to righteousness are like the stars forever and ever" (Dan 12:3) and sinners be compared to the grains of sand, because they are overcome by the waves of the world as of a sea: "I placed the sand as the bound for the sea" (Jer 5:22). 370. Then when he says, he did not weaken, he shows Abraham’s firmness. For as temperance is shown not to be weak, because it is not overcome by strong temptations, so faith is shown not to be weak but strong, because it is not overcome by great difficulties: "Resist him, firm in your faith" (1 Pt 5:9). 371. Secondly (v.19b), he mentions the difficulties from which it is shown that his faith was not weak. 190 First, on the part of Abraham himself when he says, Neither did he consider, namely, to question the promise, his own body, now dead, namely, because the reproductive power in it was slack on account of old age; hence he says, because he was about 100 years old. For "Abraham was a hundred years old when Isaac was born to him" (Gen 21:15) and it was the year before that a son had been promised him: "The Lord said, ‘I will surely return to you in the spring, and Sarah your wife shall have a son’" (Gen l8:l0). 372. But it seems that his body was dead as far as the reproductive power was concerned, because even after Sarah died he took another wife, Keturah, who bore him a number of sons, as is recorded in Gen (25:1). Some answer that the reproductive power in him was dead as far as reproducing from an old woman was concerned, but not as far as reproducing from a young woman. For old men are wont to beget offspring from the young but not from old women, who are less fit for conception. However, it seems better to say that Abraham’s reproductive power was miraculously restored both in regard to Sarah and to all women. 373. Secondly, he mentions difficulty on the part of the wife when he says, nor the dead womb of Sarah, i.e., he does not consider it so as to question the promise. He says, dead, on account of sterility as well as old age. For "it had ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women" (Gen 18:11). Hence in Is (51:2), where it is written: "Look to Abraham your father and to Sarah who bore you," the preceding passage says: "Look to the rock from which you were hewn and to the quarry from which you were digged," in order to show the feebleness and frigidity of both. 191 374. Then when he says, concerning the promise of God, be commends Abraham’s faith in the repeated promise that his seed would be exalted. First he mentions the firmness of faith; secondly, the cause of the firmness, there [v. 20b; n. 376] at giving glory to God. 375. First, therefore, he says: concerning the [repeated] promise of God, i.e., the promise that his seed would be exalted or that it would be multiplied, which was repeated: "Look toward heaven and number the stars…So shall your descendants be." (Gen 15:5); "You shall be the father of a multitude of nations" (Gen 17:4); "I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven" (Gen 22:17). Or it can refer to the exaltation of his descendants, because when he had said: "I will multiply your descendants," he added at once: "And your descendants shall possess the gates of their enemies and by your descendants shall all the nations of the earth be blessed." Concerning this promise of God no distrust made him waver, i.e., doubt the truth of the divine promise: "He who doubts is like a wave of the sea that is driven and tossed by the wind" (Jas 1:6); but he grew strong in his faith, i.e., clung firmly to his belief: "Resist him, firm in your faith" (1 Pt 5:9). 376. Then (v .20c) he gives the reason why Abraham’s faith was firm, for he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God by considering his omnipotence: "Great is his power" (Ps 147:5). Hence he continues: fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised: "Thou hast power to act whenever thou dost choose" (Wis 12:18). 192 From this it is clear that whoever is not firm in faith detracts from God’s glory either in regard to his veracity or his power. 377. Then (v.22b) he commends Abraham’s faith in regard to its effect. First, he mentions the effect it had in him, saying, that is why, namely, because Abraham believed this so firmly, it was reckoned to him as righteousness: "And it was reckoned to him as righteousness" (1 Macc 2:52). 378. Secondly, he shows the effect which his faith had on others. In regard to this he does three things. First, he shows the likeness between the effect it had in him and in others, saying, But the words, ‘It was reckoned to him,’ were written not for his sake alone, so as to make us think that for Abraham alone faith was reckoned as justice, but for ours also. It, name1y, faith, will be reckoned to us as justice: "Whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction" (Rom 15:4). Therefore, it was written for him that he might be an example to us, and for us that he might raise our hope for righteousness. 379. Secondly, there at believing in him (v.24b), he shows a likeness in faith. For what was reckoned as justice was Abraham’s faith believing that his body, as good as dead, and the barren womb of Sarah could be vivified for procreating children. It will be reckoned also to us who believe in him that raised from the dead Jesus our Lord and in God the Father, to whom he says in Ps 41 (v.10): "But do thou, 0 lord, be gracious to me and raise me up." And because the power of the Father and of the Son is the same, he also rose by his own power. 193 That this faith justifies is shown below (10:9): "If you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." 380. Thirdly, (v. 24c) he assigns the cause why faith in the resurrection of Christ justifies, saying, who, namely, Christ, was put to death [was delivered over] by God the Father: "He did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all" (Rom 8:32), by himself: "He gave himself up for us" (Eph 5:25), by Judas: "He who delivered me to you has the greater sin" (Jn 19:11) and by the Jews: "They will deliver him to the Gentiles to be mocked" (Mt 20:19). And raised for our justification, i.e., to justify us by rising: "So that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life" (Rom 6:4). That he was put to death for our sins seems plain from the fact that by his death he merited the remission of our sins, but he did not merit by rising, because in the risen state he was not a pilgrim but one who had arrived.

After showing the need for Christ’s grace, because without it neither the knowledge of the truth benefited the Gentiles nor circumcision and the Law benefited the Jews unto salvation, the Apostle now begins to extol the power of grace. Concerning this, he does two things. First, he shows what goods we obtain through grace; secondly, from what evils we are freed by it, there [v.12; n. 406] at Therefore as through one man. In regard to the first he does two things. First, he indicates the manner of reaching or the way by which we come to grace; secondly, the good things we obtain through grace, there [v. 2b; n. 384] at And we glory in the hope of glory. 196 In regard to the first he does two things. First, he exhorts to the due use of grace; secondly, he shows us the entrance to grace, there [v. 2; n. 383] at Through whom we have access. 382. First, therefore, he says: It has been stated that faith will be reckoned as justice to all who believe in Christ’s resurrection, which is the cause of our justification. Being justified therefore by faith, inasmuch as through faith in the resurrection we participate in its effect, let us have peace with God, namely, by submitting ourselves and obeying him: "Agree with God and be at peace" (Jb 22:21); "Who has hardened himself against him and been at peace?" (Jb 9:4). And this through our Lord Jesus Christ, who has led us to that peace: "He is our peace" (Eph 2:14). 383. Hence he continues: Through whom, namely, Christ, we have access as through a mediator: "One mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim 2:5); "Through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father" (Eph 2:18). Access, I say, to this grace, i.e., to the state of grace: "Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ" (Jn 1:17). In which, i.e., through which grace, we have not only risen from sin but we stand firm and erect in the heavens through love: "Our feet have been standing within your gates, O Jerusalem" (Ps 122:2); "We have risen and stand upright" (Ps 20:8). And this through faith, through which we obtain grace, not because faith precedes grace, since it is rather through grace that there is faith: "By grace you have been saved through faith" (Eph 2:8), i.e., because the first effect of grace in us is faith. 197 384. Then when he says and glory in the hope of the glory, he indicates the blessings that have come to us through grace. First, he says that through grace we have the glory of hope; secondly, that through grace we have the glory of God, there [v. 11; n. 404] at And not only so. In regard to the first he does three things. First, he shows the greatness of the hope in which we glory; secondly, its vehemence, there [v. 3; n. 386] at And not only so; thirdly, its firmness, there [v. 5; n. 390] at And hope does not confound. 385. The greatness of hope is considered in terms of the greatness of things hoped for. He sets this out when he says, and glory in the hope of the glory of the sons of God, i.e., in the fact that we hope to obtain the glory of sons of God. For through Christ’s grace we have received the spirit of sonship (Rom 8:15); "Behold how they have been numbered among the sons of God" (Wis 5:5). But to sons is due the father’s inheritance: "If sons, then heirs" (Rom 8:17). This inheritance is the glory which God has in himself: "Have you an arm like God, and can you thunder with a voice like his?" (Job 40:9). Our hope for this has been given to us by Christ: "We have been born anew to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead and to an inheritance which is incorruptible" (1Pet 1:3). This glory, which will be completed in us in the future, is in the meantime begun in us through hope: "For in this hope we were saved" (Rom 8:24), "All those who love your name will glory in you" (Ps 5:11). 386. Then when he says And not only so, he shows the vehemence of this hope. 198 For anyone who vehemently hopes for something endures difficult and bitter things for it, as a sick person who strongly desires health gladly drinks a bitter medicine to be healed by it. Therefore, the sign of the vehement hope we have for Christ is that we not only glory in virtue of our hope of future glory but also in the evils we suffer for it. Hence he says, And not only so, i.e., we not only glory in the hope of glory but we glory also in tribulation, through which we arrive at glory: "Through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God" (Ac 14:22); "Count it all joy when you meet various trials" (Jas 1:2). 387. Then he shows the cause when he says, knowing that. Here he mentions four things in order: the first is tribulation, about which he says, tribulation works patience, not in the sense that tribulation is the cause that begets it, but because suffering is the material and occasion for exercising the act of patience: "Be patient in tribulation" (Rom 12:12). 388. Secondly, he mentions the effect of patience when he says, And patience trial: "For gold is tested in the fire and acceptable men in the furnace of humiliation" (Sir 2:5). For it is plain that we accept the loss of some thing easily for the sake of another thing we love more. Hence, if a person endures patiently the loss of bodily and temporal goods for the sake of obtaining eternal benefits, this is sufficient proof that such a person loves eternal blessings more than temporal. However, James (1:3) seems to say the opposite: "The trial of your faith produces patience." 199 The answer is that trial [probatio] can be understood in two ways. In one way, as it takes place in the one tested; then the trial is the very suffering through which a man is tested. Hence, it is the same to say that tribulation produces patience and that tribulation tests patience. In another way, trial is taken for the fact of having been tested. This is the way it is taken here, because if a person endures sufferings patiently, he has been tested. 389. Thirdly, he mentions the third, saying, and trial hope, namely trial brings about hope, because after a person has been tested, hope can be had by himself and by others that he will be admitted to God’s inheritance: "God tested them and found them worthy of himself" (Wis3:5). Therefore, from the first to the last it is clear that suffering paves the way to hope. Hence, if a person rejoices strongly in hope, it, follows that he will glory in his sufferings. 390. Then when he says And hope does not confound, he shows the firmness of such hope. First, he asserts it, saying, Hope, namely, by which we hope for the glory of the sons of God, does not confound, i.e., does not fail, unless the man fails it. For a person is said to be confounded in his hope, when he falls away from the thing he hoped for: "In you, O Lord, have I hoped; let me never be disappointed" (Ps 31:1); "No one has hoped in the Lord and been disappointed" (Si 2:10). Secondly, at because the charity of God, he presents two arguments for the certainty of hope. The first is based on a gift of the Holy Spirit; the second on the death of Christ, there [v.6; n. 394] at For why did Christ. 200 392. First, therefore, he says: We can be certain that hope does not confound, because the charity of God is poured out in our hearts, through the Holy Spirit who is given to us. The love of God can be taken in two ways: in one way, for the love by which God loves us: "He loved you with an everlasting love" (Jer 31:3); in another way for the love by which we love God: "I am sure that nothing in all creation will be able to separate us from the love of God" (Rom 8:39). Both these loves of God are poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. For the Holy Spirit, who is the love of the Father and of the Son, to be given to us is our being brought to participate in the Love who is the Holy Spirit, and by this participation we are made lovers of God. The fact that we love him is a sign that he loves us: "I love those who love me" (Pr 8:17); "Not that we loved God but that he first loved us" (1 Jn 4:10). The love by which he loves us is said to be poured into our hearts, because it is clearly shown in our hearts by the gift of the Holy Spirit sealed in us: "By this we know that he abides in us, by the Spirit he has given us" (1 Jn 3:24). But the love by which we love God is said to be poured into our hearts, because it reaches to the perfecting of all the moral habits and acts of the soul; for, as is stated in 1 Cor 13(:4), "Love is patient and kind; love is not jealous or boastful...." 393. Both interpretations of these words lead to the conclusion that hope does not confound. For if they are taken to mean the love of God by which he loves us, it is clear that God does not deny himself to those whom he loves: "He loved his people; all the holy ones were in his hand" (Dt 33:3). Similarly, if they are taken as referring to the love 201 by which we love God, it is clear that he has prepared eternal goods for those who love him: "He who loves me will be loved by my father and I will love him and manifest myself to him" (Jn 14:21).

After disclosing that hope is firm, because it is a gift of the Holy Spirit [n. 391], the Apostle now traces its firmness to the death of Christ. First, he asks a question; secondly, a difficulty arises in answering it, there [v. 7; n. 396] at Why, one will hardly; 202 thirdly, he answers the question, there [v. 8; n. 398] at But God shows his love. 395. First, therefore, he says: It has been stated that hope does not disappoint. This is obvious to anyone who wonders why, while we were yet weak, Christ died for the ungodly; weak, that is, languishing in sin: "Be gracious to me, O Lord, for I am languishing" (Ps 6:2). For just as the due harmony of the humors is destroyed by bodily sickness, so by sin the correct order of our affections is removed. Therefore, when we were yet helpless, Christ died for the ungodly: "Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous" (1 Pt 3:18). And this according to the time, i.e., he was to remain dead for a definite time and then rise on the third day: "For as Jonah was three days in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Mt 12:40). Therefore, this is marvelous, if we consider who died; also if we consider for whom he died. But it could not have been so marvelous, if no fruit were to be obtained: "What profit is there in my death, if I go down to the Pit?" (Ps 30:8). None, if the salvation of the human race does not follow. 396. Then (v. 7) he shows a difficulty on the part of those for whom Christ died, i.e., the ungodly, saying, One will hardly die for the release of a just man rather, "the righteous man perishes and no one lays it to heart" (Is 57:1). That is why I say that one will hardly die though perhaps for a good man one will even dare to die, on account of his zeal for virtue. It is rare, because it is so great; for "no man has greater love than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends" (Jn 15:13). Yet what Christ did is never done, namely, 203 to die for the just and the unjust. That is why there is reason to wonder why Christ did this. 397. This passage can be interpreted in another way, so that a just man will be one trained in virtue, and a good man one who is innocent. And although according to this the just man would be more excellent than the good man, yet scarcely anyone dies for the just man. The reason is that an innocent person, who is understood as good, seems more worthy of pity on account of his lack of years or of some such thing. But the just person, because he is perfect, lacks any defect that would elicit pity. Therefore, should anyone die for an innocent person, it could be through pity; but to die for a just man requires zeal for virtue, which is found in fewer persons than the emotion of pity. 398. Then when he says But God shows (v. 8), he responds to the foregoing question. First, he sets out his response; Second, he argues from this to what he intends, there [v. 9b; n. 400] at Much more; Third, he shows how this follows of necessity, there [v. 10; n. 401] at For if while we were enemies. 399. He says therefore first. It was asked why Christ died for the ungodly, and the response to this is that, through this, God shows his love for us, i.e., through this he shows that he loves us to the greatest degree, because if while we were still sinners, Christ died for us, and this according to the time, as was explained abound. The very death of Christ shows God’s love for us, because he gave his own son that he should die in making satisfaction for us: "For God so loved the world that he 204 gave his only son" (John 3:16). And so as the love of God the Father for us is shown by the fact that he gives his own Spirit to us, as was said above, so also it is shown by the fact that he gave his son, as is said here. But by the fact that he says shows he indicates a certain immensity of the divine love, which is shown both by his own deed, because he gave his son, and by our condition, because he was not moved to do this by our merits, since we were still sinners: "God who is rich in mercy, on account of the exceedingly great love wherewith he has loved us, while we were still dead in sins, has raised us to life with Christ" (Eph 2:4). 400. Then when he says Much more, therefore (v. 9) he concludes what he had intended from the foregoing, saying: If Christ died for us while we were still sinners, much more, therefore, being now justified by his blood, as was said above in chapter 3(:25), "whom God set forth as a propitiation through faith," through his blood, shall we be saved from the wrath, i.e., from the vengeance of eternal condemnation, which men incur by their sins: "Brood of vipers, who showed you to flee from the wrath to come?" (Mt 3:7). 401. Then when he says For if while were enemies, he shows the necessity of his conclusion, which proceeds by arguing from the lesser to the greater. And one should observe here two comparisons of lesser to greater, one on our part and one on the part of Christ. On our part he compares enemies to those who are reconciled. For it seems a lesser thing that someone should treat enemies well who are already reconciled. On the part of Christ he compares death to life. For his life is more powerful than his death because, as is said the last chapter of 2Cor (13:4), "He died 205 through weakness," namely the weakness of our flesh, "but lives through the power of God." And this is why he says: with reason I concluded that much more, being enlivened, shall we be saved through him. For if while we were still enemies we were reconciled to God, and this by the death of his son, much more now that we are reconciled shall we be saved, and this by his life. 402. Now one should note that a man is said to be an enemy of God in two ways. In one way, because he practices hostility towards God when he resists his commands: "He has run against him with his neck raised up" (Job 15:26). In another way, a man is said to be an enemy of God by the fact that God hates men, not indeed insofar as he made them, because in this regard it says in Wis 11(:25), "You have loved all things, and you have hated nothing of the things you have made"; but insofar as the enemy of man, i.e., the devil, has worked in man—i.e., as regards sin: "Similarly God hates the ungodly" (Wis 14:9), and "The most high hates sinners" (Sir 12:7). 403. Once the cause of enmity, namely, sin, has been removed by Christ, reconciliation through him follows: "God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself" (2 Cor 5:19); for our sin was removed through the death of His Son. In this regard it should be noted that Christ’s death can be considered in three ways. First, precisely as a death; and so it is stated in Wisdom (1:13): "God did not make death" in human nature, but it was brought on by sin. Accordingly, Christ’s death, 206 precisely as death, was not so acceptable to God as to be reconciled through it, because "God does not delight in the death of the living" (Wis 1:13). In another way Christ’s death can be considered with emphasis on the action of the killers, which greatly displeased God. Hence St. Peter says against them: "You denied the Holy and Righteous One…and killed the Author of life" (Ac 3:14). From this aspect Christ’s death could not be the cause of reconciliation but rather of indignation. It can be considered in a third way as depending on Christ’s will, which chose to endure death in obedience to the Father: "He became obedient" to the Father "even unto death" (Phil 2:8) and out of love for men: "Christ loved us and gave himself up for us" (Eph 5:2). From this aspect Christ’s death was meritorious and satisfied for our sins; it was accepted by God as sufficient for reconciling all men, even those who killed Christ, some of whom were saved at his prayer: "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Lk 23:34). 404. Then when he says Not only so (v. 11) he shows what benefits we obtain even now through grace, saying, not only so, i.e., not only in the hope of the glory we expect in the future, but we also rejoice in God, i.e., in being even now united to God by faith and charity: "Let him who boasts, boast in the Lord" (2 Cor 10:17). And this through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have even now during this life received our reconciliation, so that we have been changed from enemies to friends: "Through him he reconciled to himself all things" (Col 1:20). 405. The verse, Not only so, can be connected with the preceding one, so that the sense would be: We shall be saved by his life from sin and punishment; and not only 207 shall we be saved from evils, but shall rejoice in God, i.e., in the fact that we shall be the same in the future with him: "That they may be one in us, even as we are one" (Jn 17:22).

After indicating the benefits we obtained through Christ’s grace [n. 381], the Apostle now indicates the evils from which we were set free. And concerning this he does three things. First, he shows that through Christ’s grace we have been freed from the slavery of sin; secondly, from the slavery of the Law, in chapter 7, there [n. 518] Or do you not know, brothers; thirdly, from condemnation, in chapter 8, there [n. 595] at There is therefore now no condemnation. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows that by Christ’s grace we are set free from original sin; secondly, that we are shielded against future sins, there [c. 6; n. 468] at What therefore shall we say. In regard to the first be does two things: first, he deals with the history of sin; 208 secondly, of grace destroying sin, there [v. 15; n. 430] at But the gift is not like the trespass. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he sets forth the origin of sin; second, he manifests it, there [v. 13; n. 421] at Sin was indeed in the world. Concerning the first, he does two things: first, he sets forth the origin of sin; secondly, its universality, there [v. 12b; n. 417] at And so death passed. In regard the first he does two things: first, he shows the origin of sin; secondly, the origin of death, there [v. 12b; n. 416] at And through sin death. 407. First, therefore, he says that we have been reconciled through Christ. For reconciliation came into the world from Christ, as sin came into the world through one man, namely, Adam: "As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive" (1 Cor 15:22). Here it should be noted that the Pelagian heretics, who denied the existence of original sin in infants, claim that these words of the Apostle must be understood of actual sin which, according to them, entered this world through Adam, inasmuch as all sinners imitate Adam: "But like Adam they transgressed the covenant" (Hos 6:7). But, as Augustine says against them, if the Apostle were speaking of the entrance of actual sin, he would not have said that sin entered this world through a man but rather through the devil, whom sinners imitate: "Through the devil’s envy death entered the world" (Wis 2:24). 209 Therefore, the interpretation is that sin entered this world through Adam not only by imitation but also by propagation, i.e., by a vitiated origin of the flesh in accordance with Eph (2:3): "We were by nature children of wrath" and Ps 51 (v.5): "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity." 408. But it seems impossible that sin be passed from one person to another through carnal origin. For sin exists in the rational soul, which is not passed on by carnal origin, not only because the intellect is not the act of any body and so cannot be caused by the power of bodily seed, as the Philosopher says in Generation of Animals, but also because the rational soul, being a subsistent reality (inasmuch as it can perform certain acts without using the body and is not destroyed when the body is destroyed), is not produced in virtue of the body’s being produced (unlike other forms which cannot subsist of themselves), but is caused by God. Therefore, it seems to follow that sin, too, which is an accident of the soul, cannot be passed on by carnal origin. The reasonable answer seems to be that although the soul is not in the seed, nevertheless there is in it a power disposing the body to receive the soul which, when it is infused into the body, is also adapted to it in its own way for the reason that everything received by something exists in it according to a mode of the recipient. That is why children resemble parents not only in bodily defects, as a leper begets a leprous child and a person with gout a gouty child, but also in defects of the soul, as an irascible parent begets irascible children and mad parents mad offspring. For although the foot subject to gout or the soul subject to anger and madness are not in the seed, nevertheless in the seed is a power which forms the bodily members and disposes them for the soul. 210 409. Yet a difficulty remains, because defects traced to a vitiated source do not involve guilt. For they are not deserving of punishment but rather of pity, as the Philosopher says of one born blind or in any other way defective. The reason is that it is the character of guilt that it be voluntary and in the power of the one to whom the guilt is imputed. Consequently, if any defect in us arose through origin from the first parent, it does not seem to carry with it the nature of guilt but of punishment. Therefore, it must be admitted that as actual sin is a person’s sin, because it is committed through the will of the person sinning, so original sin is the sin of the nature committed through the will of the source of human nature. 410. For it must be remembered that just as the various members of the body are the parts of one human person, so all men are parts and, as it were, members of human nature. Hence Porphyry says that by sharing in the same species many men are one man. Furthermore, the act of sin performed by a member, say the hand or the foot, does not carry the notion of guilt from the hand’s or foot’s will but from the whole person’s will, from which as from a source the movement of sin is passed to the several members. Similarly, from the will of Adam, who was the source of human nature, the total disorder of that nature carries the notion of guilt in all who obtain that nature precisely as susceptible to guilt. And just as an actual sin, which is a sin of the person, is drawn to the several members by an act of the person, so original sin is drawn to each man by an act of the nature, namely, generation. Accordingly, just as human nature is obtained through generation, so, too, by generation is passed on the defect it acquired from the sin of the first parent. 211 This defect is a lack of original justice divinely conferred on the first parent not only in his role as a definite person but also as the source of human nature -- a justice that was to be passed along with human nature to his descendants. Consequently, the loss of this original justice through sin was passed on to his descendants. It is this loss that has the aspect of guilt in his descendants for the reason given. That is why it is said that in the progression of original sin a person infected the nature, namely, Adam sinning vitiated human nature; but later in others the vitiated nature affects the person in the sense that to the offspring is imputed as guilt this vitiated state of nature on account of the first parent’s will, as explained above. 411. From this it is clear that although the first sin of the first parent is passed on to the descendants by generation, nevertheless his other sins, or even those of other men, are not passed on to their children, because it was only through the first sin that the good of nature, originally intended to be passed on by generation, was lost. Through all later sins the good of personal grace is lost, which does not pass on to one’s descendants. This also explains why, although Adam’s sin was removed by his repentance: "She delivered him from his transgression" (Wis 10:2), nevertheless his repentance could not remove the sin of descendants, because his repentance was performed by a personal act, which did not extend beyond him personally. 412. Consequently, there is but one sole original sin, because the defect following upon the first sin is the only one passed on to the descendants. Therefore, the Apostle is careful to say that through one man sin came into the world, and not "sins," which he would have said, if he were speaking of actual sin. 212 But sometimes it is said in the plural: "And in sins did my mother conceive me" (Ps 51:7) because it contains many sins virtually, insofar as the corruption of bodily desire [fomes] inclines one to many sins. 413. It seems, however, that original sin entered this world not through one man, namely, Adam, but through one woman, namely, Eve, who was the first to sin "From a woman sin had its beginning and because of her we all die" (Si 25:24). This is answered in a gloss in two ways: in one way, because the custom of Scripture is to present genealogies not through the woman but through the men. Hence, the Apostle in giving, as it were, the genealogy of sin makes no mention of the woman but only of the man. In another way, because the woman was taken from the man; consequently, what is true of the woman is attributed to the man. But this can be explained in another and better way, namely, that since original sin is passed on along with the nature, as has been said, then just as the nature is passed on by the active power of the man, while the woman furnishes the matter, so too original sin. Hence, if Adam had not sinned, but Eve only, sin would not have been passed on to their descendants. For Christ did not contract original sin, because he took his flesh from the woman alone without male seed. 415. Augustine uses these words from the apostle Paul to respond to the heretic Julian, who asked: "The who is born does not sin, the who begot him does not sin, the one who bore him does not sin; through what crack, therefore, in such a garrison of innocence do you suppose sin has entered?" But Augustine responds: "Why do you seek 213 22 Augustine, De Nuptiis et Conc., book 2, ch 28. a crack when you have a wide open gate? For according to the Apostle, sin entered into this world through one man."22 416. Then he touches on the entry of death into this world when he says, and death through sin entered this world: "Ungodliness purchases death" (Wis 1:12). However, it seems that death does not arise from sin but from nature, being due to the presence of matter. For the human body is composed of contrary elements and, therefore, is corruptible of its very nature. The answer is that human nature can be considered in two ways: in one way according to its structural principles, and then death is natural. Hence Seneca says that death is natural not penal for man. In another way man’s nature can be considered in the light of what divine providence had supplied it through original justice. This justice was a state in which man’s mind was under God, the lower powers of the soul under the mind, the body under the soul, and all external things under man, with the result that as long as man’s mind remained under God, the lower powers would remain subject to reason, and the body to the soul by receiving life from it without interruption, and external things to man in the sense that all things would serve man, who would never experience any harm from them. Divine providence planned this for man on account of the worth of the rational soul, which, being incorruptible, deserved an incorruptible body. But because the body, which is composed of contrary elements, served as an instrument for the senses, and such a body could not in virtue of its nature be incorruptible, the divine power furnished which was lacking to human nature by giving the soul the power to maintain the body 214 incorruptible, just as a worker in metal might give the iron, from which he makes a sword, the power never to become rusty. Thus, therefore, after man’s mind was turned from God through sin, he lost the strength to control the lower powers as well as the body and external things. Consequently, he became subject to death from intrinsic sources and to violence from external sources. 417. Then when he says and so death passed (v. 12c) he shows the universality of this process in regard both to death and to sin, but in reverse order. For above he treated first of the entry of sin, which is the cause of death’s entry; but now he deals first with the universality of death as with something more obvious. Hence he says, and so death or the sin of the first parent, spread to all, because men merit the necessity of dying on account of a vitiated origin: "We must all die" (2 Sam 14:14); "What man can live and never see death?" (Ps 89:48). 418. Then he touches on the universality of sin when he says, because [in whom] all men sinned. According to Augustine this can be understood in two ways: in one way, in whom, i.e., in the first man, or in which, namely, in that sin; because while he was sinning, all sinned in a sense, inasmuch as all men were in him as in their first origin. 419. But since Christ derived his origin from Adam (Lk 3:23 ff), it seems that even he sinned in Adam’s sin. Augustine’s answer in On Genesis is that Christ was not in Adam as completely as we were, for we were in him according to bodily substance and according to seed. But Christ was in him in the first way only. 215 Some who interpreted these words incorrectly supposed that the entire substance of all human bodies, which is required for a true human nature, was actually in Adam and that in virtue of a multiplication traced to God’s power, something taken from Adam was increased to form such a quantity of bodies. But this is far-fetched, because it explains the works of nature by a miracle. Indeed, it is obvious that the human body, even though it is required for the integrity of human nature, corrupts and becomes a corpse. Hence it is better to say that, because everything generable is corruptible and vice versa, the matter which was present under some form other than human before a man is begotten, received the form proper to human flesh. Accordingly, not everything in our bodies that belongs to the integrity of human nature was in Adam actually, but only according to origin in the way that an effect is present in its active principle. According to this, therefore, there are in human generation the bodily material, which the woman proffers, and an active force, which is in the male’s seed; both are derived originally from Adam as their first principle. Hence, they are said to have been in him according to seed and according to bodily substance, inasmuch as both came forth from him. But in Christ’s generation there was the bodily substance which he obtained from the virgin; in place of the male seed was the Holy Spirit’s active power, which is not derived from Adam. Consequently, Christ was not in Adam according to his seedly power, but only according to bodily substance. Thus, therefore, we not only receive sin from Adam and contract it; we also derive human nature from him as from an active principle -- which amounts to being in him according to seedly power. But this is not true of Christ, as has been stated. 216 420. Finally, it seems that original sin does not pass on to all, because the baptized are cleansed of original sin. Hence, it seems that they cannot transmit to their descendents something they do not have. The answer is that through baptism a man is freed from original sin as far as the mind is concerned, but the infection of sin remains as far as the flesh is concerned. Hence the Apostle says below (7:22): "I serve the law of God with my mind, but the law of sin with my flesh." But man does not beget children with the mind but with the flesh; consequently, he does not transmit the new life of Christ but the old life of Adam.

After tracing the origin of sin and death and their entry into the world [n. 406], the Apostle now clarifies what he has said. First, he explains his statement; secondly, he clarifies the comparison he suggested (in v. 12), when he said: "as sin…so death"; thirdly, he explains it, there [v. 14b; n. 429] at who is a figure of the one who was come. 217 Now he had stated that sin and death passed on to all men. Here, in line with Augustine’s exposition [n. 418], he intends to explain this by the fact that sin remained even under the Law, implying that it was unable to expel it. In regard to this he does two things: first, he explains his statement as far as sin is concerned; secondly, as far as death is concerned [v. 14; n. 424]. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows that sin existed under the Law; secondly, what the Law did in regard to sin [v. 13b; n. 423]. 422. First, therefore, he says: It has been stated that all have sinned in Adam, because even the Law did not take away sin. Before [until] the law, i.e., even under the Law, sin was in the world. This can be understood of the natural law and the Law of Moses; similarly, for actual sin and original sin. For original sin was in the child until the law of nature, i.e., until he reached the use of reason through which man adverts to these laws: "In sins did my mother conceive me" (Ps 51:5). Nor does this sin pass away with the coming of the natural law in a man; rather, it grows through the addition of actual sin, because, as stated in Ec (7:20): "There is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins." But if we understand it of the Law of Moses, then the statement that sin was in the world until the Law can be understood not only of original sin but also of actual, because both sins continued in the world before the Law and under the Law: "Who can say, ‘I have made my heart clean?’" (Pr 20:9). 218 423. But although the Law did not remove sin, it produced knowledge of sin which previously was not recognized. Hence he continues, but sin was not imputed. This is obvious, if it is understood of the natural law. For although original sin is in the child before the natural law and is counted against him by God, it was not imputed to him by men. But if it be understood of the Law of Moses, it is clear that some actual sins were not imputed before the Law, as those which are specifically forbidden by the Law, which men did not regard as sins; for example, "You shall not covet" (Ex 20:17). But certain sins were imputed, inasmuch as they were against the law of nature. Hence, Joseph is sent to prison on a charge of adultery (Gen 39:11 ff). 424. Then he deals with death, saying: Although sins were not imputed before the Law, yet death, i.e., spiritual, i.e., sin or eternal damnation, of which it is written: "The death of the wicked is very evil" (Ps 34:21), reigned, i.e., exercised its power over men, by bringing them to damnation, from Adam through whom sin entered the world, to Moses, under whom the Law was given: "The law was given through Moses" (Jn 1:17), not only over those who sinned actually, but even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who sinned actually: "But like Adam they transgressed the covenant; there they dealt faithlessly with me" (Hos 6:7), because even the children incurred damnation. 425. Under this sense it is also possible to understand bodily death, through which is shown the presence of sin, even when it was not imputed. As if to say: Sin indeed was not imputed before the Law, but we know that it existed, because death reigned, i.e., bodily, first by bringing suffering, such as hunger, thirst and sickness, and finally by 219 destroying life, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, i.e., even over children who committed no actual sins, because even they suffered bodily death before and after the Law: "What man can live and never see death?" (Ps 89:48). 426. Ambrose explained these words in another way, namely, of actual sin only, and of the Mosaic Law. According to him these words were written to explain that sin entered this world through the first parent and passed on to everyone. For until the law, i.e., before the Law of Moses, sin was in the world, namely, actual sin. For men sinned against the law of nature in manifold ways. Hence, it is said in Gen (13:13): "The men of Sodom were the wickedest." But sin was not imputed when there was no law, not as though it was not imputed as something to be punished by men, since there are records of men being punished for sin before the time of the Law (Gen c. 39 & 40); but it was not considered as something to be punished by God. For at that time men did not believe that God would punish or reward men’s actions: "Thick clouds enwrap him, so that he does not see" (Jb 22:14). But after the Law was given by God, it was recognized that sins are imputed by God for punishment and not only by men. Consequently, because men did not believe that they would be punished by God for their sins, they sinned freely and without restraint, whenever they did not fear human judgment. Hence he adds: But death, i.e., sin, reigned, i.e., exercised its power in every way, from Adam to Moses excluded. For when the Law was given through Moses, it began to weaken the reign of sin, inculcating fear of divine judgment: "Oh, that they had such a mind as this always, to fear me and keep my commandments" (Dt 5:28). Sin reigned, I say, until Moses, not over all but over those who sinned in the likeness of Adam. 220 For Ambrose says that not is not found in the ancient manuscripts; hence, he believes it was added by corrupters. Adam, indeed, believed the devil’s promise more than God’s threat, as is clear in Gen (c.3); in a way, then, he preferred to devil to God. Therefore, idolaters sin in the likeness of Adam’s sin, because they abandon the worship of God to venerate the devil. Over such, therefore, death, i.e., sin, reigned completely, because it possessed them entirely. But there were true worshippers of God before the Law; yet even if they sinned, sin did not reign over them, because it did not separate them totally from God. Rather, they sinned under God, i.e., under faith in the one God, if they sinned mortally, or under charity, if they sinned venially. 427. From both these interpretations a third can he obtained which seems more in accord with the Apostle’s intention. For he had said (v. 12) that "through one man sin entered this world"; but because sin is a transgression of the divine law, it might seem that this would not be true during the time before the Law, especially since he had stated in (4:l5): "Where there is no law, there is no transgression. Consequently, one might suppose that sin entered the world not through a man hut through the Law. To exclude this he says, until the law, i.e., the time before the Law, sin was in the world, both original and actual, but it was not recognized as something to be punished by God. And this is what he adds, but sin was not imputed, namely, as something against God, since the law, i.e., divinely given, did not exist. 428. For there were certain persons, as the Philosopher says in Ethics V (ch. 10), who believed that nothing is just by nature and, consequently, nothing unjust, but only because there is a human law. According to this, a sin was not imputed as being contrary to God, especially original sin, since it was not known. 221 But the error of this opinion is shown by the effect, because bodily death reigned from Adam, through whom original sin entered the world, until Moses, under whom the Law was given. Consequently, since death is the effect of sin, especially original, it is clear that before the Law there was original sin in the world. But lest anyone suppose that they died on account of actual sins, he excludes this, when he says that it reigned even over those who did not sin by their own act, namely, children and the just who did not sin mortally, but did sin in the first man, as has been stated. Therefore, he adds, in the likeness of Adam’s sin, inasmuch as they contracted the likeness of that sin through their origin along with the likeness of nature. As if to say: The fact that they died without personal sin shows that the likeness of Adam’s sin had been spread in them in virtue of origin. And this is what the Apostle intends to convey, namely, that original sin entered the world through Adam. 429. Then (v.14b) he explains the likeness which was understood in the adverb, "as" [sicut] (v. 12). Hence he says, who, namely, Adam, was a type, i.e., a figure, of the one who was to come, i.e., of Christ, although in an opposite way. For just as sin and death entered the world through Adam, so justice and life entered through Christ: "The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven" (1 Cor 15:47). There are other likenesses between Christ and Adam, namely, that just as Adam’s body was formed without intercourse, so Christ’s body from the Virgin. Again, just as the woman was taken from the side of the sleeping Adam, so from the side of the sleeping Christ flowed blood and water (Jn 19:34), which signify the sacraments by which the Church was formed.

After discussing the entry of sin into this world, the Apostle treats of the history of grace, which abolishes sin. And concerning this he does two things. First, he shows how the grace of Christ removed sin, which entered the world through one man; secondly, how it removed sin, which superabounded with the coming of the Law [v. 20; n. 448]. 223 In showing how Christ’s grace removed the sin introduced into the world by Adam, he compares Christ’s grace to Adam’s sin, stating that Christ’s grace can accomplish more good than Adam’s sin accomplishes evil. And concerning this he does two things. First, he compares the causes, namely, Christ’s grace, with Adam’s sin; secondly, he compares their effects [v. 16; n. 435]. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he gives the comparison; secondly, he clarifies it [v. 15b; n. 432]. 431. First, therefore, he says: It has been stated that Adam is the type of the one who was to come, but not like the trespass is the free gift. As if to say: the efficacy of Adam’s trespass must not be considered the equal of Christ’s gift. The reason is that sin came from the weakness of the human will, but grace comes from the immensity of the divine goodness, which excels the human will, especially in its weakness. Therefore, the power of grace exceeds every sin; consequently, David said: "Have mercy on me, O God, according to thy abundant mercy" (Ps 51:1). For this reason Cain’s attitude is justly reproved: "My sin is too great to merit pardon" (Gen 4:13). 432. Then (v.15b) he explains what he had said, namely, that the gift of grace exceeds Adam’s trespass, saying, if through one man’s trespass, namely, Adam’s, many died, i.e., if sin and death passed on to many others, because it passed on to all who sinned in him, much more have the grace of God and the free gift, where the "and" serves to explicate. Or, grace of God refers to the remission of sin as above (3:24): "Justified by his grace as a gift"; but gift refers to the blessings over and above the remission of sins, as 224 in Ps 67 (v.19): "The Lord gave gifts to men." Much more, I say, have the grace and gifts abounded for many. For the more potent something is, the more it can extend to a greater number. But the fact of death, which was Adam’s sin, extended to many. Hence, he says significantly that by the trespass of one many have died. For death is the argument for original sin, as stated above, for God said to Adam: "In the day that you eat of it, you shall die" (Gen 2:17). God’s grace, which is stronger, extends much more abundantly to many: "Who brings many sons to glory" (Heb 2:10). 433. It should be noted that he says, abounded, because God’s grace reached many not only to erase the sin incurred from Adam but also to remove actual sins and to bestow many other blessings: "God is able to provide you with every blessing in abundance" (2 Cor 9:8). For just as sin abounded from one man to many through the first suggestion of the devil, so God’s grace abounded to many through one man. Hence, he says, in the grace, i.e., through the grace, of that one man Jesus Christ. For grace is poured out by God upon many, in order that we might receive it through Christ, in whom every fullness of grace is found; "From his fullness have we all received, grace upon grace" (Jn 1:16). 434. This is how the text should be read according to Augustine’s interpretation, such that the word "many" is not taken comparatively but absolutely. So Augustine would have it that the comparison points to this, that if the sin of the one man Adam spread to many, much more will the grace of the one man Christ spread to many. But according to Ambrose the word "many" should be taken comparatively, so that the meaning is that by the sin, i.e., the actual sin, of one man, namely Adam, many, 225 not all, died by the death of sin, namely by imitating the sin of Adam by idolatry, as was explained above [n. 426]. Wisdom 13(:10) says of idolaters: "They are unhappy, and their hope is among the dead." And much more has the grace of God abounded unto many, namely more than in the idolaters who sinned in the likeness of Adam, because not only their sins are taken away by the grace of Christ but also the sins of those who persevered in the faith of the one God: "He will put away our iniquities: and he will cast all our sins into the bottom of the sea" (Mic 7:19). 435. Then when he says, and the free gift, he compares Christ’s grace to Adam’s sin as regards the effect, because not only does each affect many, but Christ’s grace had a greater effect than Adam’s sin. And concerning this he does three things. First, he states his proposition; secondly, he clarifies it [v. 16b; n. 437]; thirdly, he proves it [v. 17; n. 438]. 436. First, therefore, he says: Not only does Christ’s grace more abound for many than Adam’s sin, but it produces a greater effect in them. And this is what he says: The free gift is not like the effect of that one man’s sin. As if to say: Not as great an effect comes to many through the one sin of Adam as comes to many through the gift of Christ’s grace. For the effect of a stronger cause is stronger. Hence, since it has been established that grace is stronger than Adam’s sin, it follows that it produces a greater effect. 437. Then (v.16b) he clarifies what he has said: For the judgment, i.e., God’s punishment, following one trespass, i.e., the sin of the first parent, brought condemnation on all men, because they sinned in his sin, as stated above (v.12): "Death spread to all 226 men because all men sinned." But the free gift, which is given through Christ, following many trespasses, i.e., following not only that one original sin but also many actual sins, brings justification, i.e., comp1ete cleansing: "And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified" (1 Cor 6:11). 438. Then when he says, If, because of one man’s trespass, he proves what he has said, namely, that Christ’s grace passes from many sins to righteousness. First, he proves this from something later; secondly, from something earlier [v. 19; n. 445]. 439. In regard to the first it should be noted that in the foregoing comparison the Apostle does not posit things that correspond, i.e., things of the same class. For on the side of sin he posits condemnation, which pertains to punishment, while on the side of grace he posits justification, which does not pertain to reward but to the state of merit. Consequently, in stating that sin brings condemnation the Apostle intends to show that grace brings justification. He uses this argument: As the condemnation of death proceeds from the first parent’s sin, so the kingdom of life proceeds from Christ’s grace. 440. For these two correspond uniformly, but no one can attain to the kingdom of life save by justice. Therefore, men are justified by Christ’s grace. First, he lays down the premises; secondly, he draws the conclusion [n. 442]. 441. He states the first premise when he says, If, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, because it was stated above (v.12): "Sin came into the world through one man and death through sin," much more will those reign in life, namely, eternal, through the one man Jesus Christ, who says (Jn 10:10): "I came that 227 they may have life, and have it abundantly," by sharing in the eternity of life, the abundance being designated here by "kingdom." Hence, it is stated in Rev (20:4) that they will reign with Christ a thousand years, i.e., eternally. The minor premise is presented in the words, those who receive the abundance of grace and the gift of justice. As if to say: Men cannot attain to the kingdom of life except by receiving this. Here Christ’s grace is referred to the remission of sin, which no merits can anticipate and, therefore, is due entirely to grace: "If it is from works, it is no longer by grace" (Rom 11:6). Gift refers to the gifts by which men are advanced in blessings: "He gave gifts with royal liberality" (Est 2:18). Justice refers to upright actions: "Whom God made our righteousness" (1 Cor 1:30). 442. Then when he says, Therefore as one man’s trespass, he draws the intended conclusion which states the same thing as stated earlier, namely, that as by the sin of one man, Adam, the divine judgment led all men born of him according to the flesh to death, so by the righteous of one, namely, Christ, divine grace passed to all men, leading to acquittal and life for all men. 443. But this seems false, since not all men are justified by Christ, although all men die through Adam. To answer this it must be noted that just as all men born according to the flesh from Adam incur condemnation through his sin, so all men who are reborn spiritually through Christ obtain the justification of life, because, as stated in Jn (3:5): "Unless one is born of water and the spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." 228 Although it can be said that Christ’s justification passes on to justify all men in the sense that it is capable of doing so, although de facto it passes only to believers. Hence, it is stated in 1 Tim (4:10): "He is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe." 444. From what is said here we should gather that as no one dies except through Adam’s sin, so no one is justified except through Christ’s righteousness; and this is brought about through faith in him "The righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe" (Rom 3:22). But the men who believe in him are not only those who lived after the resurrection but even those who lived before. For as we believe in him as one who was born and suffered, so they believed in him as one who would be born and suffer. Hence, our faith and theirs is the same: "Having the same spirit of faith…we too believe and so we speak" (2 Cor 4:13). Thus it is that the grace of Christ redounds to the justification of many by appeal to something later, namely to the reign of life. 445. Then the Apostle proves the same thing from something prior, when he says, For as by one man’s disobedience. For causes are similar to their effects. But the disobedience of the first parent, which bears the character of unrighteousness, made men sinners and unrighteous. Therefore, the obedience of Christ, which bears the character of righteousness, made them righteous. And this is what he stated previously, namely, that grace proceeds forth into all men unto justification (v.16). 229 446. But there seems to be some problem about the statement that by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, i.e., all who are born from his seed. For his first sin seems to have been pride rather than disobedience, as is stated in Sir (10:13): "The beginning of every sin is pride." In answer it must be noted that the same writer says in 10(:21), "The beginning of pride makes men separate themselves from God," because the first step of pride consists in a man’s not willing to be subject to God’s precepts, which pertains to disobedience. Hence, man’s first sin seems to have been disobedience, not as far as the outward action was concerned but in regard to the inner movement of pride, by which be wills to go against the divine command. Hence, the Lord reproves his disobedience: "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten of the tree of which I commanded you, ‘You shall not eat of it, cursed is the ground…in your work. In you labor you shall eat from it all the days of your life" (Gen 3:17). On the other hand Christ’s obedience consisted in accepting death for our salvation in accordance with the Father’s command: "He became obedient unto death" (Phil 2:8). This, of course, does not contradict the statement that Christ died out of love for us (Eph 5:2), because the obedience proceeded from the love he had for the Father and for us. 447. And one should not that by obedience and disobedience he proves that through one man we were made sinners and through one man we were justified, because legal justice, which is the ensemble of all virtues, is recognizable in observing the precepts of the law, which pertains to the notion of obedience. But legal injustice, which 230 is the ensemble of all wickedness, is recognizable in transgressing the precepts of the law, which pertains to the notion of disobedience. Consequently, it is fittingly stated that by obedience men were made just and by disobedience sinners.

After showing that through the gift of grace that sin is removed, which entered this world through Adam [n. 430], the Apostle now shows that through Christ’s grace is taken away the sin that increased when the Law came. Concerning this he does two things. First, he mentions the increase of sin through the Law; secondly, the absolution of sin through Christ’s grace, there [v.20b; n. 464] at And where sin abounded. 449. First, therefore, he says: It has been stated that through the obedience of one man many are made just. However, it was not the Law that could achieve this; rather, the law entered in secretly [subintravit] that sin might abound. 450. Two problems arise from these statements of the Apostle. 231 First, from the statement that the Law subintravit, i.e., entered secretly, "after original and actual sin or after the natural law," as the Gloss says. For the Law did not come in secretly but was given openly, in accord with John 18(:20), "I have not spoken in secret." The answer is that although the legislation had been given openly, the mysteries of the Law were hidden, especially in regard to God’s intention in promulgating the Law, which would point out sin without healing it: "Who has known the mind of the Lord?" (Rom 11: 34). It can also be said that the Law sub-intravit, i.e., entered into the middle, so to speak, between man’s sin and the gift of Christ’s grace, each of which he had said above passed from one [man] to many. 451. The second problem arises from the statement that the Law came in that sin might abound. For this would seem to make increase of sin the purpose of the Law; consequently, the Law would be evil, because a thing whose purpose is evil is itself evil. But this is contrary to the statement in 1 Tim 1(:8), "We know that the law is good." 452. A Gloss answers this in three ways [cf. n. 459, 460]. First, that the word that [ut] should be taken as indicating not a causal connection but a mere sequence. For the Law was not given in order that sins might increase; rather, the Law, as far as in it lay, forbade sin: "I have laid up thy word in my heart, that I might not sin against thee" (Ps 119:11). But, once the Law was given, increase of sin followed in two ways [cf. n. 458]. 232 453. In one way, as to the number of sins. For although the Law pointed out sin, it did not take away desire for sin [concupiscentia]. Indeed, when someone is forbidden what he desires, he burns with a stronger desire for it, as a torrent flows with greater force against an obstacle erected against it and finally breaks it. 454. There can be three reasons for this. First, because when something is subject to a man’s power he does not consider it anything great, whereas he perceives a thing beyond his power as great. But a prohibition against something desired puts that thing, as it were, beyond man’s power; consequently, the desire for it increases as long as it is prohibited. The second reason is that internal affections, when they are kept within and permitted no outlet, burn the more strongly within. This is clear in sorrow and anger which, when they are kept within, continually increase; but if they are given any kind of release outwardly, their vigor is dissipated. But a prohibition, since it threatens a penalty, compels man not to give outward expression to his desire, so that, being kept within, it burns more vigorously. The third reason is that anything not forbidden is regarded as something possible to do any time it pleases us; therefore, even when the opportunity is present, we often avoid doing it. But when something is forbidden, it is measured as something not capable of being ours at just any time; therefore, when the opportunity arises to obtain it without fear of punishment, we are readier to seize it. 455. These, then are the reasons why in the face of the Law, which forbade acts of concupiscence and yet did not mitigate that concupiscence, the concupiscence itself leads men more feverishly toward sin. Hence, it is stated in Ezekiel 5(:5), "This is Jerusalem; I 233 have set her in the center of the nations, with countries round about her. She wickedly rebelled against my ordinances more than the nations, and against my statutes more than the countries round about her." 456. But according to this it seems that every human law, which of course does not confer grace to lessen concupiscence, would make sin increase. However, that seems to be against the lawgiver’s intention, because his aim is to make the citizen good, as the Philosopher says in Ethics II. The answer is that the intention of human law is one thing and that of divine law another. For human law is subject to human judgment, which is concerned with external acts; but the divine law is subject to divine judgment, which is concerned with the inward movement of the heart, as is said in 1 Sam 16(:7), "Man looks on the outward appearance, but God looks at the heart." Accordingly, human law achieves its aim when by means of prohibitions and threats of punishment it prevents external sinful acts, even though the inward concupiscence increases more. But as far as the divine law is concerned, it imputes as sin even the inward evil desires, which increase when the law forbids them without destroying them. 457. Yet it should be noted, as the Philosopher says in Ethics X, that although a legal prohibition restrains the ill disposed from outward sins by the fear of punishment, it nevertheless guides the well disposed through love of virtue. Now that good disposition is present to a certain extent by nature, although its perfection is achieved only by grace. Consequently, even after the Old Law had been given, sin did not increase in all but in the majority. But some, guided by the law’s prohibitions and further strengthened by 234 grace, reached the heights of virtue: "Let us now praise glorious men…men great in virtue" (Sir 44:1). 458. Secondly [n. 453], with the coming of the Law sin abounded as far as the weight of guilt was concerned. For sin was more grievous when it became a transgression not only of the law of nature but also of the written law. Hence it was said above in 4(:15) that where there was no law there was no transgression. 459. A second answer [n. 452] is that the word that [ut] can be taken causally but in the sense that the Apostle is speaking of sin’s increase as far as our knowledge of it is concerned. As if to say: Law entered in secretly that sin might abound, i.e., that sin might be more abundantly known, according to the manner of speaking whereby something is said to come to pass when it is recognized. Hence, he said above (3:20) that through the law comes knowledge of sin. 460. The third answer also takes that [ut] in a causal sense, but not as meaning that increase of sin is the goal of the Law’s entering in, but what results from sin’s increase, namely, man’s humiliation. For after the Law came in, sin abounded, as was said in the first explanation. The consequence of this increase of sin was that man, recognizing his weakness, was humbled. For the proud man, presuming on his own strength, said: "There is no lack of doers, but of commanders," in accord with Ex 24(:7), "All that the Lord has spoken we will do and will be obedient." But when, after the Law had been given, the number of sins increased, men recognized how weak they were in observing the Law: "Man is weak and short-lived, with little understanding of judgment and laws" (Wis 9:5). 235 Therefore, God’s intention in giving the Law is not aimed at increasing sin but at man’s humility, for the sake of which he permitted sin to abound. Accordingly, because this [purpose] was hidden, he says that the law entered in secretly. 461. Since we are dealing with the Law and the end of the Law, two things propose themselves for consideration. First, the number of senses of the word "law"; secondly, what is the end of the law [n. 463]. In regard to the first it should be noted that "law," taken one way, names the entire scripture of the Old Testament; for example, John 15(:25) says, "It is to fulfill the word that is written in the law, that now they have sin and hated both me and my Father," when this was written in a Psalm [24:19]. But sometimes the "law" refers to the five books of Moses, in accord with Deut 33(:4), "Moses commanded us a law." Thirdly, the precepts of the Decalogue are called the "law": "I will give you the tables of stone, with the law and commandment, which I have written for their instruction" (Ex 24:12). Fourthly, the entire content of the ceremonial precepts is called the "law," as in Heb 10(:1), "Since the law has but a shadow of the good things to come." Fifthly, any definite ceremonial precept is called a "law," as in Lev (7:11): "This is the law of the sacrifice of peace offerings." But in this section of the epistle, the Apostle takes "law" in a general way, i.e., as referring to the total doctrine of the Mosaic Law, namely, the moral and ceremonial precepts, because through the ceremonies of the Law grace was not given help man fulfill the precepts and to reduce concupiscences. 463. In regard to the end of the Law it should be noted that among the Jewish people, as among every people, there were three kinds of men: the adamant, i.e., sinners 236 and rebels, the proficient and the perfect. With respect to the adamant the Law was given as a scourge both as to the moral precepts to whose observance they were compelled by threats of punishment, as is evident from Leviticus 2, and as to the ceremonial precepts, which were multiplied to prevent them from cultivating alien gods: "With a strong hand and outstretched arm, and with anger poured out I will rule over you" (Ezek 20:34). For the proficient, who are called the ordinary people [mediocres], the Law was a pedagogue: "The law was our pedagogue in Christ" (Gal 3:24). It was so with respect to the ceremonial precepts, by which they were restrained in divine worship, and with respect to the moral precepts, by which they were advanced toward justice. For the perfect the Law regarding ceremonies was a sign: "I gave them my Sabbaths, as a sign between me and them, that they might know that I the Lord sanctify them" (Ezek 20:12); the Law regarding morals acted as a consolation, as expressed below (7:22); "I delight in the law of God." 464. Then when he says where sin abounded, he shows how increase of sin was taken away by grace. First, he sets out that grace abounded; secondly, the effect of abounding grace, there [n. 467] at that as sin has abounded. 465. First, therefore, he says: It has been stated that with the coming of the Law sin abounded. But this was no obstacle to the divine plan for the salvation of the Jews and of the whole human race, because where sin abounded, namely, in the human race and especially among the Jews, grace superabounded, namely, the grace of Christ forgiving sins: "God is powerful to make every grace abound in you" (2 Cor 9:8). 237 466. Two reasons can be given for what is said here. One is based on the effect of grace. For just as the enormity of a disease is not cured except by a strong and effective medicine, so an abundant grace was required to heal the abundance of sins: "Many sins are forgiven her, for she loved much" (Lk 7:47). The other reason is based on the attitude of the sinner. Some, realizing the enormity of their sins, give way to despair and contempt: "When wickedness comes, contempt comes also" (Pr 18:3); others by the help of divine grace are humbled when they consider their sins and so obtain a greater grace: "Their infirmities were multiplied; afterwards they made haste" (Ps 16:4). 467. Then when he says That as sin has reigned unto death, he shows the effect of abounding grace, an effect that corresponds by way of opposition to that of sin. That as sin, introduced by the first man and abounding through the Law, has reigned, i.e., obtained complete dominion over men, and this until it brought them unto death both temporal and eternal: "The wages of sin is death" (Rom 6:23) - grace also, i.e., God’s, might reign, i.e., rule entirely in us, by justice, which it produces in us: "They are justified by his grace" (Rom 3:24). And this until it brings us to eternal life: "The free gift of God is eternal life" (Rom 6:23). And all of this is through Jesus Christ our Lord, who is the giver of grace: "Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ" (Jn 1:17); he is justice: "Whom God made our righteousness" (1 Cor 1:30); and he is the giver of eternal life: "I give them eternal life" (Jn 10:28).

After showing that it is through Christ’s grace that we are freed from the sin of our first parent and from that which abounded by reason of the Law [n. 406], the Apostle now shows that Christ’s grace gives us the power to resist further sin. In regard to this he does two things: first, he raises a question suggested by the foregoing; secondly, he answers it [v. 2; n. 470]. 469. Above he had said that "where sin increased, grace abounded all the more." This could be misinterpreted by supposing that an increase of sin causes grace to abound all the more. That is why he asks: What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? One would have to say, Yes, if increase of sin were the cause and 239 not merely the occasion of grace abounding. Hence he had stated above (3:8): "And why not do evil that good may come? -- as some slanderously charge us with saying." "Why does the way of the wicked prosper? Why do all who are treacherous thrive?" (Jer 12:1). 470. Then (v. 2) he answers the question. First, he states why we should not continue in sin; secondly, he ends with an exhortation [v. 12; n. 492]. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows why we should not continue in sin; secondly, he shows that we have the power not to continue in sin [v. 6; n. 478]. In regard to the first he presents the following argument: If we are dead to sin, we ought not live in sin. But we are dead to sin. Therefore, we ought not live in sin. Therefore, in regard to this he does four things: first, he states the conditional proposition; secondly, he proves the antecedent [v. 3; n. 472] thirdly, be concludes the consequent [v. 4; n. 476]; fourthly, he proves that the consequent necessarily follows [v. 5; n. 477]. 471. First, therefore, he says, By no means are we to continue in sin that grace may abound, because "God has not given anyone permission to sin" (Si 15:20). For how can we who died to sin, inasmuch as sin has been put to death in us, still live in it? For it is not the natural order of things to return from death to life: "They are dead, they will not live" (Is 25:14); "I had bathed my feet, how could I soil them?" (S of S 5:3). 472. Then (v. 3) he proves the antecedent, namely, that the faithful are dead to sin: 240 first, he presents the fact he uses to prove his point; secondly, he proves it [v. 4; n. 474]. 473. First, therefore, he says: Do you not know? As if to say: What I am about to propose to you is so obvious that you cannot fail to see it -- "if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized" (1 Cor 14:38) -- namely, that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus. This can be interpreted in three ways: first, as indicating that baptism was instituted by Jesus Christ; "Make disciples of all nations, baptizing them" (Mt 28:19); secondly, as indicating that it is conferred in the name of Christ: "In the name of Jesus Christ they were baptized, both men and women" (Ac 8:12); thirdly, into Christ Jesus, i.e., into some likeness of Christ Jesus: "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ" (Gal 3:27). Were baptized into his death, i.e., into a likeness of his death as re-presenting in ourselves the very death of Christ: "Always carrying in the body the death of Jesus" (2 Cor 4:10); "I bear on my body the marks of Jesus" (Gal 6:17). Or into his death, i.e., by virtue of his death: "He freed us from our sins by his blood" (Rev 1:5). Hence, from the side of Christ hanging on the Cross flowed blood and water after his death (Jn 19:34). Therefore, just as we are configured to his death, inasmuch as we have died to sin, so he has died to his mortal life, in which there was the likeness of sin, although no sin was there. Therefore, all we who are baptized are dead to sin. 474. Then (v. 4) he proves that we are all baptized in conformity with the death of Christ, saying, we were buried with him by baptism into death. As if to say: Burial is only for the dead: "Let the dead bury their dead" (Mt 18:22). 241 By baptism, however, men are buried with Christ, i.e., conformed to his burial. For just as a buried man is put under the earth, so one being baptized is submerged under water. Hence, there are three immersions in baptism not only to indicate belief in the Trinity but also to represent the three days of Christ’s burial. And just as the three days of burial were one burial, so the triple immersion constitutes one baptism. That is also why solemn baptism is celebrated in the Church on Holy Saturday, when the burial of Christ is commemorated and on the vigil of Pentecost in honor of the Holy Spirit, from whom the water of baptism derives its power to cleanse: "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven" (Jn 3:5). 475. Yet it must be noted that in the body one dies before he is buried, but in the spiritual order the burial of baptism causes the death of sin, because the sacraments of the New Law bring about what they signify. Hence, since the burial which occurs through baptism is a sign of the death of sin, it produces such a death in the baptized. And this is what he says, namely, that we were buried into death, so that in receiving in ourselves the sign of Christ’s burial we might obtain death to sin. 476. Then (v. 4b) he infers the consequent, namely, that we should not live in sin. To this end he adduces a likeness to the resurrection of Christ, saying that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, i.e., by the Father’s power, whereby the Father himself is glorified: "let thy glory be over all the earth" (Ps 57:5), we too might walk in newness of life, i.e., advance in the spiritual life through good works. For the life of sin carries with it the weakness of old age, because it leads to dissolution: "What is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away" (Heb 8:13); hence Bar (3:10) says: "Why is it, O Israel, that you are in the land of your enemies" but whatever 242 leads to restoration is called newness of life: "Your youth is renewed like the eagle’s" (Ps 103:5) "Be renewed in the spirit of your minds" (Eph 4:25). 477. Then (v. 5) he shows how the consequence follows necessarily. For after he died, Christ arose; hence it is fitting that those who are conformed to Christ’s death in baptism should be conformed also to his resurrection by leading a blameless life. And that is what he says: For if we have been united with him in a death like his, i.e., if we are incorporated into him as a branch is grafted to a tree, the, as we are united with Christ in his passion, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his, so as to lead a blameless life and attain to a glory similar to his in the future life: "He will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body" (Phil 3:21); "If we have died with him, we shall also live with him" (2 Tim 2:11). Thus, after using our likeness to the death of Christ to prove that we are dead to sin, the Apostle used our likeness to the resurrection of Christ to show that we should not live in sin; which he introduces above as a consequence.

After showing that we should not continue to sin after baptism has made us dead to sin [n. 470], the Apostle now shows that we have the means to do this. Concerning this he does two things. First, he indicates the benefit we have received; secondly, the effect of this benefit [v. 7; n. 482]. Concerning this he does two things. First he sets out the benefit we obtain; Second, the effect of this benefit [v. 6b; n. 481]. 479. First, therefore: We have said that the baptized should walk in newness of life. To anyone who says that this is impossible he responds that we know our old self, i.e., the oldness caused by sin, was crucified with him, i.e., put to death by the Cross of Christ. For as was stated above, man’s oldness was brought about by sin -- in the sense that the goodness of his nature was corrupted by sin -- and is predominant as long as he continues in sin. But because what is predominant in a man characterizes the man himself, it follows that the oldness of sin in a man subject to sin is an apt description of the man himself. That is why he says the old self. 244 480. Now the oldness of sin can refer to the guilt of sin or to the stain of actual sins or even to the habit of sinning, which engenders a sort of compulsion to sin, or even to the "fomes" deriving from the sin of the first parent. Thus, therefore, our old self is said to be crucified together with Christ, inasmuch as the aforesaid oldness is removed by the power of Christ; either because it has been entirely removed, as the guilt and stain of sin are entirely removed in baptism, or because its force has been diminished, i.e., the force of the "fomes" or even of the custom of sinning: "Having canceled the bond which stood against us with its legal demands; this he set aside, nailing it to the cross" (Col 2:14). 481. Then (v. 6b) he mentions the twofold effect of this benefit, the first of which is the removal of previous sins. Hence he says: that the body of sin may be destroyed. The body of sin is the assemblage of evil deeds, just as the assemblage of members makes one natural body: "His body is like molten shields." (Jb 41:6). The second effect is that it makes us beware of future sins; hence, he adds: and we might no longer be enslaved to sin. For a man is a slave of sin, when he obeys the attraction of sin by consenting to and doing the sin: Everyone who commits sin is a slave to sin" (Jn 8:34). 482. Then (v. 7) he clarifies what he had said: first, in regard to the first effect; secondly, in regard to the second [v. 8; n. 484]. 483. In regard to the first it should be noted that the assemblage of sins is destroyed when a man has his sins remitted. So he clarifies how the body of sin is 245 destroyed when he says he who has died to sin through baptism, in which we die together with Christ, is freed from sin, i.e., transferred to the state of righteousness: "And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified" (1 Cor 6:11). Therefore, because man dies to sin through the cross of Christ, he is freed from sin in such away that the body of sin destroyed. 484. Then (v. 8) he clarifies the second effect by showing how it conforms one to the life of Christ. The reasoning is this: One who dies with the dying Christ also lives with the rising Christ. But Christ rose from the dead, never to die again. Therefore, one who has died to sin lives with the risen Christ in such a way that he has the faculty of never returning to sin. 485. In regard to this he does three things: first, he shows the believer’s conformity to the risen Christ; secondly, a condition of this life [n. 487]; thirdly, he draws the conclusion [v. 11; n. 491]. 486. First, therefore, he says: But if we have died with Christ, i.e., if we are dead to sin by virtue of Christ’s death, we believe that we shall also live with him, i.e., in the likeness of his life. We shall live, I say, the life of grace here and the life of glory in the future: "When we were dead through sin, he made us alive together with Christ" (Eph 2:5). 487. Then (v. 9) he describes the condition of life of the risen Christ: first, he states it; 246 secondly, he proves it [v. 10; n. 489]. 488. First, therefore, he says: We believe this, I say, because we know that Christ being raised from the dead will never die again, but will live an everlasting life: "I died, and behold I am alive for evermore" (Rev 1:18). What is more, death no longer has dominion over him, but it does over man: not only when his soul and body are separated when he dies, but also before he dies, when he is subject to sickness, hunger, thirst and such things as lead to death. From all these things the life of the risen Christ is free. Consequently, he is not subject to the dominion of death; rather, he has dominion over death: "I have the keys of Death and Hades" (Revs 1:18). 489. Then (v. 10) he proves his statement, namely, that the risen Christ will not die again. And he proves this in two ways [n. 490]. First he proves it with a reason based on the death he underwent, saying: The death he died, he died to sin, once for all. This must not be taken to mean that he died to sin he committed or contracted, because sin had no place whatever in him: "Who did no sin" (1 Pt 2:22). But he is said to have died to sin in two ways: in one way, because he died to take away sin: "For our sake he made him who knew no sin to be sin" (2 Cor 5:21), i.e., a victim for sin. In another way, because he died to the likeness of sinful flesh, i.e., to a suffering and mortal body: "God sent his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh" (Rom 8:3). In both ways it can be concluded that Christ died once, from the fact that he died to sin. In regard to the first it is clear that he wiped out all sins through one death: "By a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified" (Heb 10:14). 247 Therefore, he does not need to die again for sin: "For Christ also died for sins once for all" (1 Pt 3:18). In regard to the second the same can be concluded. For if Christ endured death in order that the likeness of death disappear from him, his death ought to have been like that of others, who wear the flesh of sin and die but once. Hence, it says in Heb (9:27): "Just as it is appointed for men to die once, so Christ also offered once to bear the sins of many." 490. Secondly, he shows the same thing by considering the condition of life he obtained by rising. Hence he says: But the life he lives he lives to God, i.e., conformed to God. For it says in 2 Cor (13:4): "He was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God." Now the effect is conformed to the cause. Hence, the life which the rising Christ acquired is deiform. Therefore, just as God’s life is everlasting and without decay: "Who alone has immortality" (1 *** 6:16), so Christ’s life is immortal. 491. Then (v. 11) he reaches the intended conclusion that we be conformed to the life of the risen Christ both with respect to its death to sin, i.e., to the mortal life which has the likeness of sin, never to return to it, and with respect to living conformed to God. In regard to the first he says: So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin, i.e., as never to return to sin: "Let not the dead live" (Is 26:14). In regard to the second he says: and alive to God, i.e., to the honor and in the likeness of God, that we never die through sin: "The life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God" (Gal 2:20). So he adds, in Christ Jesus, i.e., through Jesus Christ, through whom we die to sin and live to God; or in Christ Jesus, i.e., as incorporated into Christ Jesus, that by his 248 death we may die to sin and by his resurrection live to God: "He made us alive together with Christ, by whose grace you have been saved through Christ" (Eph 2:5).

After showing that we ought not remain in sin [n. 470] and that we have the faculty for this [n. 478], the Apostle concludes with a moral exhortation. And concerning this he does three things: 249 first, he proposes an admonition; secondly, he assigns a reason [v. 14; n. 496]; thirdly, he raises and solves a question [v. 15; n. 499]. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he proposes the admonition; secondly, he clarifies [v. 12b; n. 494]. 493. First, therefore, he says: We have said that our old self was crucified once, so that the body of sin may be destroyed. This means that the power of sin has been so weakened that it cannot rule us. Therefore, let not sin reign in your mortal bodies any longer. He does not say: Let not sin be in your mortal body, because as long as our body is mortal, it is not possible for sin not to be in our body, i.e., the inclination to sin. But since we have been freed from the kingdom of sin by God, we must struggle in order that sin not recover its dominion now lost in our body. And this is what he says: Let not sin reign in your mortal body. This is something about which one must be on his guard, as long as we wear the mortal body: "The corruptible body is a load upon the soul" (Wis 9:15). 494. Then (v.12b) he clarifies this admonition. In regard to this it should be noted that sin reigns in man in two ways: in one way, through internal consent of the mind. To remove this he says: to make you obey their passions. For it is by obeying the passions of sin with our minds that sin reigns in us: "Go not after thy lusts" (Si 18:30). 250 In a second way sin reigns in us by performing the act. To exclude this, he adds: do not yield your members to sin, i.e., to the inclination to sin, as instruments of wickedness. For when man commits sin through his members, he yields to sin. In this way he seeks to restore sin’s dominion, which grows in us through the habit of sinning: "They went down to hell with their weapons" (Ex 32:27). 495. Then (v.13b) he urges them to the opposite, namely, to mold themselves to God. And first with regard to the internal faculties when he says: But yield yourselves to God by submitting your mind to God: "And now, Israel, what does the Lord thy God require of you but that you fear the Lord your God and walk in his ways" (Dt 10:12). And you ought to do this as men who have been brought from death to life, i.e., as led from the death of sin to the life of grace. Hence it is fitting, since he died for all, "that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised" (2 Cor 3:15). Secondly, with respect to outward actions; hence he says: Yield your members to God, i.e., to his service, as instruments of righteousness with which to fight against God’s enemies: "Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil" (Eph 6:11). 496. Then (v.14) he assigns the reason for this admonition. For someone might excuse himself, alleging that sin’s dominion is an obstacle to obeying the admonition. But the Apostle excludes this, saying: For sin will have no dominion over you, i.e., if you begin to resist sin and yield yourself to God: "Draw near to God and he will draw near to you. Resist the devil and he will flee from you" (Jas 251 4:8). As if to say: You can observe my admonition, because you do not find sin dominating and holding you. For we have been freed by Christ, as Jn (8:36) says: "If the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed." 497. Then he clarifies what he had said, saying: For you are not under the law but under grace. Here it should be noted that he is not speaking of the Law merely with respect to its ceremonial precepts, but even with respect to moral matters. For one is said to be under the Law in two ways: in one way, as voluntarily subject to the observance of the Law. Even Christ was under the Law in this way according to Gal (4:4): "Born under the law," namely, because he observed the Law, not only the moral but also the ceremonial precepts. But the faithful of Christ are under the Law in this way, with respect to the moral precepts but not the ceremonial. In another way, one is said to be under the Law as though compelled by the Law. In this way, one is under the Law when he does not obey it voluntarily from love but is compelled by fear. But such a one lacks grace which, if it were present, would incline the will to observe the Law and fulfill its moral precepts from a motive of love. Therefore, as long as one is under the Law in such a way that he does not fulfill it voluntarily, sin has dominion over him. As a result, such a man’s will is inclined to choose what is contrary to the law. But through grace such dominion is removed; consequently, a man observes the Law not as existing under the Law but as free: "We are not children of the slave but of the free woman, by the freedom with which Christ has sat us free" (Gal 4:31). 252 498. This grace, making men freely obey the Law, was not conferred by the sacraments of the Old Law, but Christ’s sacraments conferred it. Consequently, those who submitted themselves to the ceremonies of the Law were not, so far as the power of those sacraments was concerned, under grace but under the Law, unless they happened to obtain grace through faith. But one who submits to Christ’s sacraments obtains grace from his power, so as not to be under the Law but under grace, unless they enslaved themselves to sin through their own fault. 499. Then (v. 15) he raises a question against what he has said. And concerning this he does three things: first, he raises the question; secondly, he answers it [v. 16; n. 501]; thirdly, he shows how awkward it would be to misinterpret his statement [v. 17; n. 502]. 500. In regard to the first it should be noted that his statement could be falsely interpreted, namely, that Christ’s faithful are not under the Law with respect to being obliged to obey its moral precepts. For it would follow that Christ’s faithful could lawfully commit sin and act against the moral precepts. Therefore, in this context he raises the question: What then? Are we to sin, i.e., act against the moral precepts, because, as has been said, we are not under the law but under grace? This interpretation the Apostle rejects in Gal (5:13): "For you were called to freedom, brethren, only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh." 253 23 Ambrose, De Paradiso, ch. 8. 501. In the same fashion he answers here: By no means should we sin because we have been set free from the Law; because if we were to sin, we would once more be reduced to the slavery of sin. Hence, he continues: Do you not know that if you yield yourselves of your own will to anyone as obedient slaves, you are voluntarily the slaves of the one whom you obey. For obedience is a debt which slaves owe to their master: "Slaves, be obedient to your earthly masters" (Eph 6:5). Hence, when someone obeys another, he admits that he is his slave by obeying. But different masters are obeyed for different remunerations. For the one who obeys sin is led to death through the slavery of sin. And this is what he says: either of sin, i.e., you are its slaves by obeying it, which leads to death, i.e., to the eternal damnation of the one who falls. Concerning this death it says in Rev (2:11): "He who conquers shall not be hurt by the second death." But the one who obeys God is made a slave of this obedience, because through the habit of obeying the mind is inclined more and more to obeying and as a result achieves holiness. Therefore, he says: or of obedience, namely, of the divine precepts, which leads to righteousness: "It is the doers of the law who will be justified" (Rom 2:13). Sin and obedience are fittingly presented as opposites, because, as Ambrose says, sin is a transgression of the divine law, disobedience against the heavenly commands.23 502. Then (v.17) he shows the folly o obeying sin and thereby returning to the slavery of sin: first, by considering the benefit we have received. For if someone, by another’s graciousness is freed from slavery, it is foolish to subject oneself freely to slavery. Hence, since we have been freed from sin by the grace of God, it is foolish willfully to return to the slavery of sin. 254 Secondly, by considering the state into which we were placed after freedom from sin, namely, that we are slaves to righteousness. But, it is not lawful for a slave to subject himself to the dominion of an opposite master; hence, it is not lawful, if we have been made slaves of righteousness, to return to the slavery of sin. 503. The Apostle touches on both of these considerations, when he says: I thank God, and you too should thank God, that you who were once slaves of sin may become obedient, namely, by believing, not as though compelled but from the heart: "For man believes with the heart and so is justified" (Rom 10:10) to the standard of teaching, i.e., to the doctrine of the Catholic faith: "Follow the pattern of the sound words you have heard from me" (2 Tim 1:13) to which you were committed: i.e., gave yourselves entirely: "But first they gave themselves to the Lord and to us by the will of God" (2 Cor 8:5). And having been set free from sin, so that it is not fitting for you to return to the slavery of sin, you have become slaves of righteousness, so that it is not fitting to desert righteousness: "You were bought with a price" (1 Cor 7:23) and are not your own.

After showing with a reason based on God’s grace that we should not continue in sin but should serve God, the Apostle shows the same thing with a reason based on a condition of the former life. In regard to this he does three things: first, he describes the terms in which he will present his teaching; secondly, he presents the teaching [v. 19b; n. 506]; thirdly, be gives the reason for the teaching [v. 20; n. 507]. 505. First, therefore, he says: I have advised that you yield yourselves to God. I am now speaking to you in human terms, i.e., as suited to human feebleness. For man is sometimes so presented in Scripture to signify a weakness of the human condition: "I am a weak man, and of a short time, and falling short of the understanding of judgment and laws" (Wis 9:5); "Since there are jealousy and strife among you, are you not carnal and walking as mere men?" (1 Cor 3:3). He assigns the cause, when he adds, because of the limitations; for it is to the mature that the more perfect precepts are given: "Wisdom, however, we speak among those who are mature" (1 Cor 2:6); "Solid food is for the mature" (Heb 5:14), but lighter precepts are given to weaker men: "As to little ones in Christ, I fed you with milk, not 256 with solid food" (1 Cor 3:1); "You have become such as have need of milk and not of solid food" (Heb 5:12). But this weakness comes not from the spirit but from the flesh, because the body, which is subject to decay is a load on the soul, as it says in Wis (9:15); hence, he adds: of your flesh: "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak" (Mt 26:41). 506. Then (v.19b) he presents the teaching he called human, in which he teaches that the body must be yielded to the slavery of righteousness in the same measure as we yielded it to the slavery of sin. And this is what he says: For just as you once yielded your members, namely, by doing evil works, to impurity and to iniquity born in the heart. Here "impurity" refers to sins of the flesh: "But immorality and every uncleanness, let it not even be named among you" (Eph 5:3), and "iniquity" to spiritual sins, particularly those that harm one’s neighbor: "He plots mischief [iniquity] while on his bed" (Ps 36:4). So now, set free from sin, yield your members, namely, by performing good works, to righteousness proposed to us in the divine law: and this for sanctification, i.e., for the increase of holiness: "Let the holy still be holy" (Rev 22:11). He calls this human, because right reason demands that man serve righteousness more than he previously served sin: "For as it was your mind to go astray from God; so when you return again, you shall seek him ten times as much (Bar 4:28). 507. Then when he says, When you were slaves, he assigns the reason for this teaching. In regard to this he does two things: first, he presents a reason for the teaching; secondly, he proves something he had presupposed [v. 23; n. 516]. 257 The reason behind the above teaching is that the state of grace is preferable to the state of sin. For if more benefits accrue to us from the state of righteousness than from sin, we should be more eager to serve righteousness than we were to serve sin. First, therefore, he describes the state of sin; secondly, the state of righteousness [v. 22; n. 512]. In regard to the first he does three things: first, he describes the condition of the sinner; secondly, the effect of sin [v. 21; n. 510]; thirdly, its end [v. 21b; n. 511]. 508. In regard to the first it should be noted that man is by nature free because of his reason and will, which cannot be forced but can be inclined by certain things. Therefore, in regard to the freedom of the will man is always free of compulsion, although he is not free of inclinations. For the free judgment is sometimes inclined to the good through the habit of grace or righteousness; and then it is in slavery to righteousness but free from sin. But sometimes the free judgment is inclined to evil through the habit of sin; and then it is in slavery to sin and free from righteousness. Now, slavery to sin consists in being drawn to consent to sin against the judgment of reason: "Everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin" (Jn 8:34). And in regard to this he says: When you were slaves of sin. Freedom from righteousness, on the other hand, implies that a man rushes headlong into sin without the restraint of righteousness; in regard to this he says: you were free in regard to righteousness. This happens especially in those who sin of set purpose: "Long ago you 258 broke your yoke and burst your bonds; and you said, ‘I will not serve’" (Jer 2:20); "A vain man is lifted up into pride, and thinks himself born free like a wild ass’ colt" (Jb 11:12). 509. Yet it should be noted that this state involves true slavery and only apparent freedom. For since man should act according to reason, be is truly a slave when he is led away from what is reasonable by something alien. Furthermore, if he is not restrained by the yoke of reason from following concupiscence, he is free only in the opinion of those who suppose that the highest good is to follow one’s concupiscence. 510. Then (v.21) he shows the effect of sin. One effect he excludes, namely, a fruitful return, when he says: But then what return did you get, namely, when you were committing those sins. For the works of sin are unfruitful, because they do not help man to obtain happiness: Their works are unprofitable works" (Is 59:6); "Woe to you that devise that which is unprofitable and work evil in your beds" (Mic 2:1). The effect he mentions is confusion, saying: from the things, namely, the sins, of which you are now, in the state of repentance, ashamed because of their baseness. "You shall be ashamed of the gardens" (Is 1:29), namely, of the pleasure you had chosen. 511. Then (v.21b) he mentions the end of sin, saying: For the end of those things, namely of sins, is death. This of course is not the objective in the mind of the sinner, because be does not intend to incur death by sin; nevertheless, it is the end of those sins, because of their very nature they bring temporal death. For when the soul separates God from itself, it 259 deserves to have its body separated from it. Sins also bring eternal death, because when one wills to be separated from God for a time, he deserves to be separated from him forever; and this is eternal death: "Those who do such things deserve to die" (Rom 1:32). 512. Then (v.22) he describes the state of righteousness: first, he describes a condition of this state; secondly, the effect [v. 22b; n. 514]; thirdly, the end [v. 22c; n. 515]. 513. In regard to the first it should be noted that just as when one is by sin inclined to evil, he is free from righteousness, so when one is by the habit of righteousness and grace inclined to good, he is free from sin, so that he is not overcome by it to the point of consenting to it. Hence he says: But now in the state of righteousness, having been set free from sin: "If the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed" (Jn 8:36). On the other hand, just as in the state of sin one is a slave of sin which he obeys, so in the state of righteousness one is a slave of God and obeys him willingly: "Serve the Lord with gladness" (Ps 100:2); "O Lord, I am thy servant" Ps 116 (v.16). And this is what he adds: you have become slaves of God. But this is true freedom and the best form of slavery, because by righteousness man is inclined to what befits him and is turned from what befits concupiscence which is distinctively bestial. 514. Then (v.22b) he mentions the effect of righteousness, saying: The return you get is sanctification, i.e., the fruit of sanctity by good works is your return, inasmuch as 260 these please you in a spiritual and holy way: "My flowers are the fruit of honor and riches" (Si 24:23). 515. After that he mentions the end, saying, and its end, eternal life, which is the goal of all just men who do all their works for the sake of obtaining eternal life: "Seek first the kingdom of God and all these things will be added unto you" (Mt 6:33). It is also the end of the works themselves which merit eternal life, since they are done out of obedience to God and in imitation of God: "My sheep hear my voice, and they follow me; and I give them eternal life" (Jn 10:27). 516. Then (v.22c) he clarifies what he had said about the ends of evil and of good. First, in regard to evil he says: We have stated that the end of sins is death: the wages of sin is death. Wages or stipends were the salaries paid soldiers. These were paid in money. Therefore, because by sinning one makes war by using his members as arms for sin, death is said to be the wages of sin, i.e., the return paid to those who serve it. Death, therefore, is the return which pays those who are its slaves. It is not the end they seek but the end paid to them: "On the wicked he will rain coals of fire and brimstone; a scorching wind will be the portion of their cup" (Ps 11:6). 517. In regard to the good he says: The free gift [grace] of God is eternal life. For since he had said that just men have eternal life, which it is certain cannot be had except through grace, then the very fact that we do what is good and that our works are worthy of eternal life is the result of God’s grace: "He bestows grace and glory" (Ps 84:11). Thus, therefore, if our works are considered in themselves and as coming from our free will they do not merit eternal life ex condigno, but only as coming from the grace 261 of the Holy Spirit. Hence it says in Jn (4:14): "The water that I shall give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life." And this in Christ Jesus our Lord, i.e., through Christ or inasmuch as we exist in him through faith and love: "Every one who sees the Son and believes in him has eternal life" (Jn 6:40).