CHAPTER 2
LECTURE 1You [Gentiles], especially, dead as you were in your lapses and sins—in the past your steps were bound by them. [You were] following [the inspiration of] this world-age, the ruler of the atmosphere, that spirit which is now at work among the rebellious men. In the past all of us, [Jews] too, followed these ways. In our own fleshly passions, we did whatever our flesh and our thoughts decided. As much as the rest of mankind we were by nature under the wrath [of God].
[Read Marcus Barth, note on “this world-age” (p. 214), and “The realm of the Evil One” (p. 228).]Supra enumeravit apostolus beneficia humano generi per Christum communiter exhibita, hic apostolus commemorat eadem per comparationem ad eorum statum praeteritum. Status autem eorum praeteritus dupliciter considerari potest. Primo quidem quantum ad statum culpae;
secundo quantum ad statum gentilitatis eorum. Apostolus ergo duo facit,Above, the Apostle enumerated the blessings bestowed on the human race in general through Christ (1:3). Here the Apostle sets them in relief by comparing them to [mankind’s] own former condition. Their past state can be considered in two ways: first as a state of sin, and secondly as a state of paganism. Therefore, the Apostle does two things: quia primo commemorat beneficia quantum ad primum statum eis exhibita;
secundo commemorat ea per comparationem ad statum secundum, ibi propter quod memores estote, et cetera.First, he recounts the blessings shown them in regard to their first state.
Secondly, he recalls those related to their second state. (2:11).Prima iterum in duas, The first part has two sections: quia primo recitat apostolus statum culpae ipsorum;
secundo beneficium gratiae iustificationis, ibi Deus autem, qui dives est, et cetera.First, the Apostle describes their state of sin.
Secondly, the blessing of the grace of justification (2:4).Prima iterum in duas, Again, the first part has two divisions: quia primo commemorat statum culpae quantum ad gentiles;
secundo quantum ad Iudaeos, ibi in quibus et nos, et cetera.First, he calls to mind the state of sin with reference to the pagans.
Secondly, then with reference to the Jews (2:3).Prima iterum in duas, Once more the first has two parts: quia primo praemittit beneficii generalitatem;
secundo subdit huius necessitatem, ibi cum essemus mortui, et cetera.First, he sets down the generality of the blessing.
Secondly, he adds its necessity (2: 1)Dicit ergo: dico quod Deus magnifice operatur in fidelibus secundum operationem potentiae virtutis eius, quam operatus est in Christo, et hoc quia suscitavit illum a mortuis; secundum hanc ergo operationem ad huius operationis exemplum convivificavit nos, vita scilicet gratiae de morte peccati. Os. VI, 3: vivificabit nos post duos dies, in die tertia suscitabit nos, et cetera. Col. III, v. 1: si consurrexistis cum Christo, quae sursum sunt quaerite, et cetera. God, he says, is wondrously active in the faithful, “in accord with the exercise of his mighty power, which he worked in Christ,” (Eph 1:19) in raising him from the dead. Hence, according to this activity, and after the example of this operation, he has restored us to the life of grace from the death of sin. “He will revive us after two days: on the third day he will raise us up and we shall live in his sight” (Hos 6:3). “If you have ben raised with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is sitting at the right hand of God” (Col 3:1). Necessitatem vero huius beneficii ostendit, cum dicit cum essetis mortui, et cetera. Ubi optime describit eorum culpam. Primo quantum ad multitudinem, quia cum essetis mortui, scilicet morte spirituali, quae pessima est. Ps. XXXIII, 22: mors peccatorum pessima. Peccatum enim mors dicitur, quia per ipsum homo a domino, qui est vita, separatur. Io. XIV, 6: ego sum via, veritas, et vita. Mortui, inquam, in delictis et peccatis vestris, ecce multitudo. In delictis quidem quantum ad omissa, Ps. XVIII, 13: delicta quis intelligit, etc., et peccatis quantum ad commissa. In quibus aliquando ambulastis, quod ideo dicit, ut multitudinem peccatorum exaggeret. Nam aliqui si ad horam mortui sunt in peccatis et in delictis, cessant tamen aliquando, et peccare desistunt; sed isti, de malo in peius procedentes et ambulantes, proficiebant. Simile habetur Phil. III, 18: multi enim ambulant, quos saepe dicebam vobis, nunc autem et flens dico, et cetera. Ier. II, 5: ambulaverunt post vanitatem suam, et vani facti sunt. He demonstrates the need for such a blessing when he states when you were dead in your offenses and sins where he describes so well their sin. First of all, [he depicts] the multitude [of their sins] at And you, when you were dead with the worst type of death, spiritual death. “Evil will slay the wicked [Vul: The death of the wicked is very evil]” (Ps 34:22). Sin is termed a death because by it man is separated from God who is life: I am the way, and the truth, and the life” (Jn 14:6). Dead I say, in your offenses and sins—behold the great number! For offenses are the omissions [of what they should have done]—“Who can discover errors?” (Ps 19:13)—while sins are [the evil they] committed. Wherein in time past you walked is added to exaggerate the great number of sins. For if some are dead in offenses and sins at one time, they nonetheless cease at another time and leave off sinning; but these keep up their pace in going from bad to worse. Philippians 3 (18) contains a similar idea: “For many, as I have often told you and now tell you with tears, conduct themselves as enemies of the cross of Christ.” They “have gone after worthlessness and become worthless” (Jer 2:5). Secundo describit eorum culpam quantum ad causam quae ponitur duplex. Una ex parte huius mundi, quia alliciebantur a rebus mundi. Et quantum ad hoc dicit secundum saeculum mundi huius, id est secundum saecularem vitam rerum mundanarum, quae vos alliciunt. I Io. II, 15: si quis diligit mundum, non est charitas patris in eo. Propter quod praemittit: nolite diligere mundum. Secondly, he describes the twofold cause of their sin. One arises from this world insofar as they are attracted by the things of the world. Alia causa est ex parte Daemonum, quibus serviebant, de quibus dicitur Sap. XIV, v. 27: infandorum idolorum cultura, omnis mali causa est et initium. Et quantum ad hoc dicit et secundum principem potestatis. Quam quidem causam describit tripliciter. The other cause was the devils whom they served, of which Wisdom 14 (27) warns: “The worship of infamous is the beginning and cause and end of all evil.” Primo quidem quantum ad potestatem, dicens secundum principem potestatis, id est, potestatem exercentem, non quod habeat eam naturaliter, cum nec dominus, nec creator sit ex natura, sed inquantum dominatur hominibus qui se ei peccando subiiciunt. Io. XII, v. 31: nunc princeps huius mundi eiicietur foras. Et XIV, 30: venit princeps huius mundi, et in me non habet quidquam. First, as regards their strength he says the prince of the power. He exerts a power, not by the fact that he has it naturally, since he is neither the Lord nor creator by nature, but to the degree that he dominates over men who subject themselves to him by sinning. “Now shall the prince of this world be cast out” (Jn 12:31); “for the prince of this world is coming; he has no power over me” (Jn 14:30). Secundo quantum ad habitationem, quia aeris huius, id est qui habet potestatem in hoc aere caliginoso. Ubi sciendum est quod de istis Daemonibus duplex est opinio apud doctores. Quidam enim dixerunt Daemones qui ceciderunt, non fuisse de supremis ordinibus, sed de inferioribus, qui praesunt corporibus inferioribus. Constat autem totam creaturam corporalem administrari a Deo, ministerio Angelorum. Et haec est opinio Ioannis Damasceni, scilicet quod primus eorum qui ceciderunt, praeerat ordini terrestrium, quod forte sumptum est ex dicto Platonis, qui ponebat quasdam substantias caelestes seu mundanas. Et secundum hoc exponitur hoc quod dicit aeris huius, id est ad hoc creati, ut praesiderent aeri huic. Secondly, concerning their dwelling place he says of this air, that is, he has power in this darksome atmosphere. Here it should be noted that two opinions exist among the doctors. For some held that the demons who had fallen [from grace] were not from the higher ranks, but from the lower ones in charge of the lower bodies. Alii vero volunt, et melius, quod fuerint de supremis ordinibus, ita quod hoc quod dicit aeris huius, sit ad ostendendum ipsum aerem esse habitationem ipsorum in poenam eorum. Unde Iudas in sua canonica dicit: Angelos vero qui non servaverunt suum principatum, sed dereliquerunt suum domicilium, in iudicium Dei magni, vinculis aeternis sub caligine reservavit. Ratio autem quare non statim post eorum casum retrusi sunt in Infernum, sed dimittuntur in aere, est, quia Deus noluit quod ipsis peccantibus eorum creatio totaliter frustraretur, et ideo dedit eos hominibus in exercitium quo bonis praepararent coronam, malis autem aeternam mortem. Et quia usque ad diem iudicii est nobis tempus belli et merendi, ideo usque tunc in aere permanebunt; post diem vero iudicii retrudentur in Infernum. Others Advertendum etiam quod una littera habet spiritus, et sic est genitivi casus, et ponitur singulare pro pluralibus, quasi dicat: spirituum. Alia littera habet spiritum, et tunc est accusativi casus, ut dicatur: secundum principem spiritum, id est, qui princeps est spiritus. Observe also how one reading has “of the spirit” which, as a genitive singular, stands for the plural “of the spirits.” Another reading gives “spirit” in the accusative case; as if to say: “according to the prince spirit,” that is, the prince who is a spirit. Tertio quantum ad operationem, ibi, cum dicit qui nunc operatur in filios diffidentiae, id est in illos qui a se repellunt fructum passionis Christi, qui erant filii diffidentiae. Vel quia de aeternis non habent fidem, nec spem salutis per Christum: et in talibus princeps potestatis aeris huius libere operatur, ducens eos quo vult: de quibus infra IV, 19, dicitur: qui desperantes semetipsos tradiderunt impudicitiae, in operationem immunditiae. Vel diffidentiae, id est de quibus eis est diffidendum, id est qui ex malitia peccant, in quibus princeps huius mundi etiam operatur ad nutum. De his enim qui ex ignorantia et infirmitate peccant, non est diffidendum, nec in eis princeps iste operatur ad nutum. Thirdly, [he describes] their activity when be states that now works on the children of despair. They are the children of despair who reject the fruit of Christ’s passion. Or, those who have no faith in eternal realities nor hope in salvation through Christ. In these the prince of the power of this air freely works, leading them wherever he wishes. Later it is said of them: “They have become callous [Vul: despairing] and have given themselves up to licentiousness, greedy to practice every kind of uncleanness” (Eph 4:19). Perhaps, of despair means those of whom we should despair because they sin out of malice; the prince of this world doing whatever he pleases in them. For no one should despair of those who sin from ignorance or weakness, nor does that prince do whatever he wants with them. Sed contra. De nemine est desperandum quamdiu vivit. Respondeo. Dicendum est quod de aliquo potest esse duplex spes. Una ex parte hominis, alia ex parte divinae gratiae. Et sic de aliquo potest desperari ex parte sua, de quo tamen desperandum non est ex parte Dei, sicut desperandum erat de Lazaro iacente in sepulcro, quod resurgeret ex parte sua, de quo tamen desperandum non erat ex parte Dei, a quo resuscitatus est. De illis ergo, qui ex malitia sunt multum in peccatis demersi, si attendatur eorum virtus, desperari potest, Ps. LXVIII, 3: infixus sum in limo profundi, et non est substantia, non tamen si attendatur virtus divina. De istis autem filiis diffidentiae dicitur infra V, 6: nemo vos seducat inanibus verbis. Propter hoc enim venit ira Dei in filios diffidentiae. On the contrary, however, one should never despair of anyone else as long as he lives. I reply. Our hope in someone can be twofold. On the one hand, it can be in the man, and on the other, in divine grace. Thus someone may be despaired of as far as he himself is concerned, but never must confidence in God be lost. For instance, people rightly despaired of Lazarus’ power to bring himself back to life once he bad been placed in the tomb, but no trust should have been lost in the God who raised him up. Therefore, those who out of malice are sunk in their many sins can be despaired of from the point of view of their own strength: “I have sunk into the abysmal Mire, where there is no footing” (Ps 69:3). But no one should despair if it is a question of the divine power. Concerning these children of despair it mentions further on: “Let no man deceive you with empty words. For because of these things the anger of God comes upon the children of disobedience [Vul: despair]” (Eph 5:6). Deinde cum dicit in quibus et nos omnes, etc., commemorat apostolus statum culpae quantum ad Iudaeos, ostendens eos omnes in peccato fuisse, secundum illud Rom. III, 9: causati sumus Iudaeos et Graecos omnes sub peccato esse. Attendenda est tamen differentia circa hoc, quia apostolus, agens de culpa gentilium, assignavit duas causas culpae fuisse. Unam scilicet ex parte mundi, aliam ex parte Daemonum, quos colebant. Quia ergo Iudaei erant similes gentilibus in statu culpae, quantum ad primam causam, non autem quantum ad secundam, ideo apostolus non facit mentionem de culpa eorum, nisi quantum ad causam quae est ex parte mundi. Circa quod tria facit. Next (v. 3), the Apostle recalls the sinful state of the Jews, thereby demonstrating how everyone had sinned, according to that saying of Romans 3 (9): “For we have charged both Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin.” Nevertheless, a difference should be noted. The Apostle had designated two causes when dealing with the sin of the Gentiles, one on the side of the world and the other on that of the demons whom they worshiped. The Jews were like the Gentiles in their sinful condition in regard to the first cause, but not the second; hence, the Apostle only mentions their sin as arising from worldly causes. In reference to this he makes three points: Primo commemorat eorum culpam quantum ad peccatum cordis;
secundo quantum ad peccatum operis;
tertio quantum ad peccatum originis.First, he recounts their guilt regarding sins of the heart.
Secondly, the sins of action.
Thirdly, original sin.Peccatum vero cordis insinuat per desideria carnis, et quantum ad hoc dicit in quibus, scilicet peccatis seu delictis, nos omnes, scilicet Iudaei, aliquando conversati sumus, agentes vitam nostram, in desideriis carnis nostrae, id est, carnalibus. Tit. III, 3: eramus enim aliquando et nos insipientes et increduli, errantes et servientes desideriis et voluptatibus variis, et cetera. Rom. XIII, 14: carnis curam ne feceritis in desideriis. A sin of, the heart is implied in carnal desires. About this he asserts: in which sins and offenses also we all who are Jews conversed in time past, leading our life in the carnal desires of our flesh. “For we ourselves also were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another” (Tit 3:3). “Put on the Lord Jesus Christ; and make no provision for the desires of the flesh” (Rom 13:14). Peccatum vero operis nihil aliud est quam expressio interioris concupiscentiae. Est autem quaedam concupiscentia carnis, sicut sunt concupiscentiae naturales, puta cibi per quam conservatur individuum, et venereorum per quam conservatur species; Sin in action is nothing else than a manifestation of inner concupiscence. et quantum ad hoc dicit facientes voluntatem, etc., id est, ea in quibus caro delectatur. Rom. VIII, 8: qui autem in carne sunt, Deo placere non possunt. Quaedam vero est concupiscentia cognitionis, eorum scilicet quae non veniunt ex desideriis carnis, sed ex ipso appetitu animae, ut honoris ambitio et propriae excellentiae, et huiusmodi; et quantum ad hoc dicit et cogitationum, id est exequentes illas concupiscentias, quae causantur ex instinctu cogitationum nostrarum. Regarding these he says fulfilling the will of the flesh, doing what the flesh delights in. “And they who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom 8:8). Another concupiscence exists, that of thought. These desires do not spring from the flesh but from the appetitive faculty of the soul, such as the ambition for honors, for one’s own excellence and the like. Of these he states and of our thoughts, that is, inordinate desires are followed once they are caused by the prompting of our reflections. Peccatum vero originis insinuat dicens et eramus natura filii irae. Quod quidem peccatum ex primo parente non solum in gentiles, sed etiam in Iudaeos transfunditur. Rom. V, 12: sicut per unum hominem in hunc mundum peccatum intravit, et per peccatum mors; ita et in omnes homines mors pertransivit, in quo omnes peccaverunt. Et sicut homines per Baptismum mundantur a peccato originali solum quantum ad personas proprias, unde generant filios baptizandos, ita circumcisio mundabat ab originali personas solum, sed generabant adhuc circumcidendos. Et hoc est quod dicit eramus natura, id est per originem naturae, non quidem naturae ut natura est, quia sic bona est et a Deo, sed naturae ut vitiata est, filii irae, id est vindictae, poenae et Gehennae, et hoc sicut et caeteri, id est gentiles. Original sin is hinted at in and we were by nature children of wrath. This sin of the first parent was not only passed on to the Gentiles but to the Jews also: “Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned” (Rom 5:12). Baptism cleanses only the individual person who receives it from original sin; his children must also be baptized. Likewise, circumcision cleansed only the individual from original sin; the children they begot still had to be circumcised. Thus he says we were by nature, that is, from the earliest beginning of nature—not of nature as nature since this is good and from God, but of nature as vitiated—children of an avenging wrath, aimed at punishment and hell, even as the rest, that is, the Gentiles.
CHAPTER 2
LECTURE 2But
God who is rich in mercy
—for he loves us with all his love—
just because we were dead in our lapses
has made us alive together with the Messiah.
By grace you are saved!
For he has in the Messiah Jesus
raised and enthroned us together in the heavens.
In order to prove throughout the ages to come,
through the goodness [shown] to us in the Messiah Jesus,
how infinitely rich is his grace.
[Read Marcus Barth, note on structure of verses 4-10 (p. 217).]Postquam exaggeravit apostolus statum culpae inficientis, hic commendat beneficium gratiae iustificantis. Circa quam duo facit. After exaggerating their state of festering sin (2:1), the Apostle recounts here the blessing of the grace of justification. Concerning which he does two things: Primo ipsum beneficium ponit;
secundo seipsum exponit, ibi gratia enim estis, et cetera.First, he sets down the blessing itself.
Secondly, he explains it (2:8).Beneficium autem illud describit quantum ad tres causas. The blessing is described with reference to its three causes: Primo quantum ad causam efficientem;
secundo quantum ad causam formalem, seu exemplarem;
tertio quantum ad causam finalem.First, the efficient cause.
Secondly, the formal or exemplary cause (2:5).
Thirdly, the final cause (2:7).Efficiens autem causa beneficii divini iustificantis, est charitas Dei. Et quantum ad hoc dicit Deus autem qui dives est in misericordia, propter nimiam charitatem. Dicit autem propter nimiam charitatem, quia dilectionis divinae possumus considerare quadruplicem bonitatem et efficientiam. Primo quia nos in esse produxit. Sap. XI, 25: diligis enim omnia quae sunt, et nihil odisti eorum quae fecisti, et cetera.
secundo quia ad imaginem suam nos fecit, et capaces beatitudinis suae. Deut. XXXIII, 2-3: cum eo sanctorum millia, in dextra illius ignea lex, dilexit populos, omnes sancti in manu illius sunt.
tertio quia homines per peccatum corruptos reparavit. Ier. XXXI, 3: in charitate perpetua dilexi te, et ideo, et cetera. Quarto quia pro salute nostra filium proprium dedit. Io. III, 16: sic Deus dilexit mundum, ut filium suum unigenitum daret. Unde Gregorius: o inaestimabilis dilectio charitatis. Ut servum redimeres, filium tradidisti.The efficient cause of the divine blessing of justification is God’s charity: But God, who is rich in mercy, for his exceeding charity wherewith he loved us. He states for his exceeding charity since we can think of a fourfold goodness and efficacy of the divine love. First, it brought us into existence: “For you love all things that are, and hate none of the things which you have made” (Wis 11:25). Second, he made us according to his own image, capable of enjoying his own beatitude: “He [God] came from Miribath-Kadesh [Vul & lit: thousands of saints]. At his right hand a fire blazed forth. He has loved the people; all the saints are in his hand” (Deut 33:2-3). Third, he renewed men corrupted by sin: “Yea, I have loved them with an everlasting love; therefore have I drawn thee, taking pity on thee” (Jer 31:3). Fourth, for our salvation he gave over his own Son: “For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son” (Jn 3:16). Hence Gregory exclaims: “O the incalculable love of your charity! To redeem slaves you delivered up your Son.” Dicit autem qui dives est in misericordia, quia cum amor hominis causetur ex bonitate eius qui diligitur, tunc homo ille qui diligit, diligit ex iustitia, inquantum iustum est quod talem amet. Quando vero amor causat bonitatem in dilecto, tunc est amor procedens ex misericordia. Amor autem quo Deus amat nos, causat in nobis bonitatem, et ideo misericordia ponitur hic quasi radix amoris divini. Is. LXIII, 7: largitus est in eis secundum indulgentiam suam, et secundum multitudinem misericordiarum suarum. Ibidem: multitudo viscerum tuorum et miserationum tuarum super me. He then asserts who is rich in mercy. When a man’s love is caused from the goodness of the one he loves, then that man who loves does so out of justice, inasmuch as it is just that he love such a person. When, however, love causes the goodness in the beloved, then it is a love springing from mercy. The love with which God loves us produces goodness in us; hence mercy is presented here as the root of the divine love: “The favors of Yahweh I will recall, the praises of Yahweh for all that Yahweh has done for us... which he has given according to his kindness and the multitude of his mercies” (Is 63:7). And “where is your zealous care and might, your surge of pity and mercy toward me?” (Is 63:15). Dicitur autem Deus dives in misericordia, quia habet eam infinitam et indeficientem, quod non habet homo. In tribus enim homo miseretur cum termino et limitatione. Primo quidem largiendo beneficia temporalia, et haec misericordia est finita, non excedens limites propriae facultatis. Tob. IV, 8: quomodo potueris, ita esto misericors; sed Deus dives est etiam in omnes qui invocant illum, ut dicitur Rom. X, 12.
secundo est finita misericordia hominis quia non remittit nisi offensam propriam, et in hoc etiam modus esse debet, ut scilicet non sic passim remittat, ut ille cui remittit efficiatur procacior, pronior et facilior ad iterum offendendum. Eccle. VIII, 11: etenim quia non profertur cito contra malos sententia, absque timore ullo filii hominum perpetrant mala. Deo autem nihil nocere potest, et ideo potest omnem offensam remittere. Iob c. XXXV, 6: si peccaveris, quid ei nocebis? Et parum post: porro si iuste egeris, quid donabis ei?
tertio, homo miseretur poenam remittendo, et in hoc etiam est modus servandus, scilicet ut non facias contra legis superioris iustitiam: Deus autem poenam omnium remittere potest, cum non obstringatur aliqua superioris lege. Iob XXXIV, 13: quem constituit alium super terram, et quem posuit super orbem quem fabricatus est? Sic ergo misericordia Dei est infinita, quia non coarctatur angustiis divitiarum, neque timore nocumenti restringitur, et neque lege superioris.God is said to be rich in mercy because he possesses an infinite and unfailing mercy, which man does not. For man has a mercy that is bounded or limited in three ways. Firstly, in bestowing temporal benefits, man’s mercy is restricted by the amount of his own possessions. “If you have little, do not be afraid to give from that little” (Tob 4:8); whereas God is “enriches all who call upon him” (Rom 10:12). Secondly, the mercy of man is limited since he can only pardon offenses against himself. Even with these there ought to be a certain qualification; he should not forgive so indiscriminately that whoever is pardoned becomes more bold, prone and ready to offend again. “For, because sentence is not speedily pronounced against the evil, the hearts of the sons of men are fully set to do evil” (Eccl 8:11). But nothing can harm God and hence he can forgive every offense: “If you sin, what harm do you do to him?” And a little further on, “And if you act rightly, what do you give him?” (Job 35:6 & 7). Thirdly, a man shows mercy in remitting punishment; yet here too a qualification must be observed: he must not contravene the justice of a higher law. God, on the other hand, can remit all punishment since he is not bound by any higher law: “Who gave him charge over the earth? Or who else set the land in its place?” (Job 34:13). Thus the mercy of God is infinite because it is not limited by a scarcity of wealth, nor is it restricted through a fear of injury, nor by any higher law. ausa vero exemplaris beneficii est, quia in Christo collata est. Et quantum ad hoc dicit cum essemus mortui peccatis, convivificavit nos in Christo, et cetera. Ubi tangit triplex beneficium, id est: iustificationis, resurrectionis a mortuis, et ascensionis in caelum, per quae tria Christo assimilamur. The exemplary cause of the blessing is that it is granted in Christ. In reference to this he states even when we were dead in sins, he has quickened us together in Christ. He touches upon a triple blessing: justification, resurrection from the dead, and ascension into heaven—through these three we are assimilated to Christ. CDicit ergo quantum ad primum, ut legatur littera suspensive, Deus autem, qui dives est, etc., cum essemus mortui peccatis, convivificavit nos in Christo, id est simul vivere fecit cum Christo. Os. VI, 3: vivificabit nos post duos dies, et cetera. Convivificavit, inquam, hic scilicet per viam iustitiae. Ps. LXV, v. 9: qui posuit animam meam ad vitam. Et hoc in Christo, id est per gratiam Christi, cuius, scilicet Christi, gratia estis salvati. Rom. VIII, 24: spe enim salvi sumus. Quantum vero ad secundum dicit et conresuscitavit nos cum Christo, quantum ad animam in re, et spe quantum ad corpus. Rom. VIII, 11: qui suscitavit ipsum a mortuis, vivificabit et mortalia corpora nostra, et cetera. Quantum vero ad tertium dicit et consedere fecit in caelestibus in Christo Iesu, scilicet nunc per spem, et tandem in futuro in re, quia, ut dicitur Io. XII, 26: ubi ego sum, illic et minister meus erit, et cetera. Item Apoc. III, v. 21: qui vicerit, dabo ei sedere mecum in throno meo, sicut et ego vici, et sedi cum patre meo in throno eius. He states, that the whole text might be read, concerning the first: God, who is rich in mercy, for his exceeding charity wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, has quickened us together in Christ, he has made us live together with Christ. “He will revive us after two days: on the third day he will raise us up and we shall live in his sight” (Hos 6:3). He has quickened us, I say, through a life of justice: “Who placed us among the living” (Ps 66:9). This occurs in Christ, that is, through the grace of Christ by whose grace you are saved. “For we are saved by hope” (Rom 8:24). Regarding the second, he says and has raised us up together with Christ—for the soul [this has happened] in reality, in hope the body [awaits it]. “He who raised Jesus Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit which dwells in you” (Rom 8:11). In respect to the third he asserts and has made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, now through hope, and in the future in reality. For, as John 12 (26) puts it: “Where I am, there also will my servant be. If anyone serves me, my Father will honor him.” Also the Apocalypse 3 (21): “He who conquers I will grant him to sit with me in my throne; as I myself have conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne.” Utitur autem in his apostolus praeterito pro futuro, enuntians tamquam iam factum quod futurum est, pro certitudine spei. Sic ergo convivificavit quantum ad animam, tandem resuscitavit quantum ad corpus, consedere fecit quantum ad utrumque. In these the Apostle uses the past tense in place of the future, proclaiming as already accomplished what has yet to be done on account of the certitude of hope. Thus God has quickened us in soul, he has raised us up in body, and has made us sit with Christ in both [body and soul]. Consequenter cum dicit ut ostenderet, etc., ostendit causam finalem collati beneficii. Quod quidem potest dupliciter legi, quia saecula supervenientia vel possunt accipi in vita ista, vel in vita futura. Si enim accipiantur in vita ista, tunc saeculum est quaedam mensura temporis et periodus unius generationis, ut dicatur sic: dico quod nos, qui sumus primitiae dormientium, convivificavit in Christo, et hoc ut ostenderet in saeculis supervenientibus, id est his qui futuri sunt post nos, abundantes divitias gratiae suae, et hoc non meritis nostris, sed bonitate sua, quae est scilicet super nos in Christo Iesu, id est per Christum Iesum. I Tim. I, 15 s.: Iesus Christus venit in hunc mundum peccatores salvos facere, quorum primus ego sum. Sed ideo misericordiam consecutus sum, ut in me ostenderet Christus omnem patientiam ad informationem illorum qui credituri sunt illi in vitam aeternam. Sic ergo Deus largitus est sanctis primitivis abundantia dona gratiae, ut posteri facilius convertantur ad Christum. Consequently, when he says that he might shew in the ages to come, he discloses the final cause of the blessing which has been given. It can be read in two ways, depending on whether ages to come pertains to the present or future life. If it applies to this life, then age is a certain measure of time and a period of one generation. As though he affirmed: I am saying that we who are the first-fruits of those who sleep (cf. 1 Thes 4:12 ff.), he has quickened in Christ that he might show in the ages to come, to those who will exist after us, the abundant riches of his grace. And this is not on account of our merits, but in his own goodness towards us in Christ Jesus, that is, through Christ Jesus. “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of these I am the foremost. But I have received mercy for this reason, that in me first Christ Jesus might display his perfect patience, as an example for those who would believe in him for eternal life” (1 Tim. 1:15-16). Therefore, God has communicated copious gifts of grace to the early saints that later generations would more easily be converted to Christ. Vel potest aliter accipi saeculum, scilicet in alia vita, de quibus dicitur Eccli. XXIV, 14: et usque ad futurum saeculum non desinam. Sed licet ibi sit unum saeculum, quia ibi est aeternitas, dicit tamen in saeculis supervenientibus, propter multitudinem sanctorum participantium aeternitatem: ut dicantur ibi tot saecula, quot sunt aeternitates participatae. De his saeculis dicitur in Ps. CXLIV, 13: regnum tuum regnum omnium saeculorum. Dicit ergo secundum hunc sensum: dico quod vivificavit nos in spe, scilicet per Christum, vel in gratia, ut ostenderet in saeculis supervenientibus, id est in alia vita compleret, abundantes divitias gratiae suae, id est abundantem gratiam, quam etiam in hoc mundo, dum multa dimittit peccata et maxima dona concedit, dicit: quae quidem superabundat in vita alia, quia ibi indeficienter habetur. Io. X, 10: ego veni ut vitam, scilicet gratiae, habeant in hoc mundo, et abundantius habeant, scilicet gloriae in patria. Or, age can be taken in reference to the next life, of which Sirach 24 (14) states: “For eternity I shall not cease to exist.” Although there will then be only one age, since it will be eternity, he nevertheless says in the ages to come on account of the numerous saints who will participate in eternity; there are said to be as many ages as there are shared-in eternities. Psalm 145 (13) speaks of these ages: “Your kingdom is an eternal kingdom.” In this sense he affirms: I say that he has vivified us in hope, namely, through Christ or in grace that he might shew in the ages to come, that is, that he might bring to perfection in the next life, the abundant riches of his grace. Such an abundant grace with which, even in this world, he forgives many sins and confers the greatest of gifts, will superabound even more in the next life, since there it will be enjoyed unfailingly. “I have come that they might have a life,” namely, of grace in this world, “and have it more abundantly” in the fatherland of glory (Jn 10:10). Et hoc in bonitate sua. Ps. LXXII, 1: quam bonus Israel Deus. Thren. III, 25: bonus est dominus sperantibus in eum, animae quaerenti illum. Et hoc supra nos, id est supra nostrum desiderium, supra nostrum intellectum, et supra capacitatem nostram. Is. LXIV, 4: oculus nos vidit, Deus, absque te, quae praeparasti expectantibus te. Et hoc in Christo Iesu, id est, per Christum Iesum, quia sicut gratia nobis confertur per Christum, ita et gloria consummata. Ps. LXXXIII, 12: gratiam et gloriam dabit dominus. Per ipsum enim beatificamur, per quem iustificamur. This occurs in his own goodness. “Israel, how good God is to those who are pure of heart!” (Ps 73:1 ). “Yahweh is good to those who wait for him, to the soul that seeks him” (Lam 3:25). This is towards us; it is beyond our desire, our understanding, and beyond our capacity: “No eye has seen any God but you acting like this for those who wait for him” (Is 64:4). And this is in Christ Jesus, that is, through Christ Jesus; for as grace is bestowed on us through Christ, so also is glory communicated, which is grace brought to perfection. “Yahweh God bestows favors and honors” (Ps 84:12). Through the same person we are beatified, through whom we are justified. Dicit autem ut ostenderet, quia thesaurus gratiae in nobis est occultus, quia habemus ipsum in vasis fictilibus, ut dicitur II Cor. IV, 7; et I Io. III, 1: videte qualem charitatem dedit nobis pater: ut filii Dei nominemur et simus. Et parum post: nunc filii Dei sumus, et nondum apparuit, et cetera. Sed ille thesaurus occultus, quia nondum apparuit, in saeculis supervenientibus ostenditur, quia in patria omnia erunt nobis aperta, quae ad manifestam sanctorum gloriam pertinent. Rom. VIII, 18: non sunt condignae passiones huius temporis ad futuram gloriam, quae revelabitur in nobis. He says that he might shew because the treasure of grace is hidden within us; we have it “in earthen vessels” as 2 Corinthians 4 (7) expresses it. “Behold what manner of charity the Father has bestowed upon us, that we should be called and should be the sons of God,” after which comes: “We know that when he shall appear we shall be like to him” (1 Jn 3:1-2). But that hidden treasure, although it has not yet been revealed, is shown in the ages to come, since in the fatherland everything relating to the transparent glory of the saints will be unveiled before us. “The sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come that shall be revealed in us” (Rom 8: 18).
CHAPTER 2
LECTURE 3By grace you are saved, through faith!
This [was] not out of your own doing—it is a gift of God—not [as a reward] for works lest anyone boast about himself.
For God himself has made us what we are.
In the Messiah Jesus we are created
for those good works which God has provided
as our way of life.
[Read Marcus Barth, “The Judaizers’ works of the law” (p. 244), “Indestructible good works” (p. 248).]Supra commemorans apostolus beneficium Dei quo liberati sumus a peccato, interposuerat quod gratia Christi eramus salvati, nunc autem illud probare intendit. Circa quod duo facit. When the Apostle was recounting above the blessing of God by which we have been freed from sin, he inserted [the thought] that we had been saved by Christ’s grace (2:5). Now he intends to prove that; he makes two points concerning it: Primo enim proponit intentionem suam;
secundo manifestat propositum, ibi et hoc non ex vobis, et cetera.First, he sets down his intention.
Secondly, he clarifies the point in question (2:8b).Dicit ergo primo: bene dixi cuius gratia estis salvati; et certe adhuc dico secure, enim, pro quia, estis salvati gratia. I Cor. XV, 10: gratia Dei sum id quod sum. Rom. III, 24: iustificati gratis per gratiam ipsius. Idem enim est salvari et iustificari. Salus enim importat liberationem a periculis; unde perfecta salus hominis erit in vita aeterna, quando ab omnibus periculis immunis erit, sicut navis dicitur esse salvata, quando venit ad portum. Is. LX, 18: occupabit salus muros tuos, et portas tuas laudatio. I rightly declared, he says of the first, by whose grace you were saved; and indeed, I still confidently say For, in place of “because,” by grace you are saved. “By the grace of God, I am what I am” (1 Cor 15: 10), “being justified freely by his grace” (Rom 3:24). For to be saved is the same as to be justified. Salvation implies a freedom from dangers; hence, man’s perfect salvation will be in eternal life when he will be immune from all dangers, as a ship is said to be safe when it has arrived at port. “You shall call your walls ‘salvation’ and your gates ‘praise’” (Is 60: 18). Huius autem salutis spem suscipiunt homines, dum in praesenti iustificantur a peccato, et secundum hoc dicuntur salvati esse, secundum illud Rom. VIII, 24: spe enim salvati sumus. Haec autem salvatio gratiae est per fidem Christi. Concurrit enim ad iustificationem impii, simul cum infusione gratiae, motus fidei in Deum in adultis. Lc. VIII, 48: vade in pace, fides tua te salvum fecit. Rom. V, 1: iustificati enim ex fide, pacem habeamus. Men receive the hope of this salvation when they are justified from sin in the present, and are thus referred to as saved according to the expression of Romans 8 (24): “For we are saved by hope.” But this salvation of grace is by faith in Christ. In the justification of an adult who has sinned, the movement of faith towards God coincides with the infusion of grace. “Your faith has saved you. Go in peace” (Lk 8:48). “Being justified, therefore, by faith, we are at peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom 5:1). Deinde cum dicit et hoc non ex vobis, etc., manifestat quod dixerat, When he next says and that not of yourselves, he clarifies what he had spoken of: et primo quantum ad fidem quae est fundamentum totius spiritualis aedificii;
secundo quantum ad gratiam, ibi ipsius enim sumus factura, et cetera.First, regarding faith, which is the foundation of the whole spiritual edifice.
Secondly, regarding grace (2: 10).Circa primum excludit duos errores, quorum primus est: quia dixerat quod per fidem sumus salvati, posset quis credere quod ipsa fides esset a nobis et quod credere in nostro arbitrio constitutum est. Et ideo hoc excludens, dicit et hoc non ex vobis. Non enim sufficit ad credendum liberum arbitrium, eo quod ea quae sunt fidei, sunt supra rationem. Eccli. III, 25: plurima supra sensum hominis ostensa sunt tibi. I Cor. c. II, 11: quae Dei sunt nemo novit, nisi spiritus Dei, et cetera. Et ideo quod homo credat, hoc non potest ex se habere, nisi Deus det, secundum illud Sap. IX, 17: sensum autem tuum quis sciet, nisi ut dederis sapientiam, et miseris spiritum sanctum tuum de altissimis? Propter quod subdit Dei enim donum est, scilicet ipsa fides. Phil. I, 29: vobis autem donatum est pro Christo non solum ut in eum credatis, sed ut etiam pro eo patiamini, et cetera. I Cor. XII, 9: alii enim datur fides in eodem spiritu. He eliminates two errors concerning the first point. The first of these is that, since he had said we are saved by faith, any one can hold the opinion that faith itself originates within ourselves and that to believe is determined by our own wishes. Therefore to abolish this he states and that not of yourselves. Free will is inadequate for the act of faith since the contents of faith are above human reason. “Matters too great for human understanding have been shown to you” (Sir 3:25). “No one knows what pertains to God except the Spirit of God” (1 Cor 2:11). That a man should believe, therefore, cannot occur from himself unless God gives it, according to that text of Wisdom 9 (17): “Who could ever have known your will, had you not given Wisdom and sent your Holy Spirit from above.” Secundo excludit alium errorem. Posset enim aliquis credere quod fides daretur nobis a Deo merito operum praecedentium, et, ad hoc excludendum, subdit non ex operibus, scilicet praecedentibus, hoc donum meruimus aliquando, quod salvati sumus, quoniam hoc ex gratia, ut supra dictum est, secundum illud Rom. XI, 6: si autem gratia, iam non ex operibus, alioquin gratia iam non est gratia. Subdit autem rationem quare Deus salvat homines per fidem, absque meritis praecedentibus, ut ne quis glorietur in seipso, sed tota gloria in Deum referatur. Ps. CXIII, 1: non nobis, domine, non nobis, et cetera. I Cor. c. I, 29: ut non glorietur omnis caro in conspectu eius, ex ipso autem vos estis in Christo Iesu. The second error he rejects is that anyone can believe that faith is given by God to us on the merit of our preceding actions. To exclude this he adds Not of preceding works that we merited at one time to be saved; for this is the grace, as was mentioned above, and according to Romans 11 (6): “If by grace, it is not now by works; otherwise grace is no more grace.” He follows with the reason why God saves man by faith without any preceding merits, that no man may glory in himself but refer all the glory to God. “Not for our sake, Yahweh, not for our sake, but for the sake of your name display your glory, because of your kindness, because of your faithfulness” (Ps 115:1-2). “That no flesh should glory in his sight. It is due to him that you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God, justice, sanctification and redemption” (1 Cor 1:29-30). Deinde cum dicit ipsius enim factura sumus, etc., manifestat quod dixerat quantum ad gratiam. Next (2: 10), he clarifies what he had said regarding grace. Concerning this he does two things: Circa quod duo facit. Primo manifestat gratiae infusionem;
secundo declarat gratiae praedestinationem, ibi quae praeparavit Deus, et cetera.First, he clarifies the infusion of grace.
Secondly, he declares the predestination of grace (2: l0b).Duo autem ad rationem gratiae pertinent, quae etiam iam dicta sunt, quorum primum est ut id quod est per gratiam, non insit homini per seipsum, vel a seipso, sed ex dono Dei. Et quantum ad hoc dicit ipsius enim factura sumus, quia scilicet quidquid boni nos habemus, non est ex nobis ipsis, sed ex Deo faciente. Ps. XCIX, 3: ipse fecit nos, et non ipsi nos. Deut. XXXII, v. 6: nonne ipse est pater tuus, qui possedit, fecit et creavit te? Et continuatur immediate cum praecedenti, ut dicatur: ne quis glorietur, quia scilicet ipsius factura sumus. Vel potest continuari cum eo quod supra dixerat: gratia enim salvati sumus. There are two essential characteristics of grace, they have already been spoken of. The first of these is that what exists through grace is not present in man through himself or by himself, but from the gift of God. In reference to this he states For we are his workmanship, whatever good we possess is not from ourselves but from the action of God. “Know that Yahweh is God: he made us, the Almighty” (Ps 99:3). “Is he not your Father, who created you, made you and fashioned you?” (Deut. 32:6). This is immediately linked with what went before: that no man may glory for we are his workmanship. Or, it can be joined with what was said above: For by grace you are saved. Secundo, pertinet ad rationem gratiae, ut non sit ex operibus praecedentibus, et hoc exprimitur in hoc quod subdit creati. Est enim creare, aliquid ex nihilo facere, unde quando aliquis iustificatur sine meritis praecedentibus, dici potest creatus, quasi ex nihilo factus. Haec autem actio, scilicet creatio iustitiae, fit virtute Christi, spiritum sanctum dantis. Propter quod subdit in Christo Iesu, id est per Christum Iesum. Gal. ult.: in Christo enim Iesu neque circumcisio aliquid valet, neque praeputium, sed nova creatura. Ps. CIII, 30: emitte spiritum tuum, et creabuntur. Ulterius, non solum datur nobis habitus virtutis et gratiae sed interius per spiritum renovamur ad bene operandum. Unde subdit in operibus bonis, quia scilicet ipsa bona opera sunt nobis a Deo. Is. XXVI, 12: omnia enim opera nostra operatus es in nobis. The second essential characteristic of grace is that it is not from previous works; this is expressed when he adds created. To create anything is to produce it from nothing; hence, when anyone is justified without preceding merits, he can be said to have been created as though made from nothing. This creative action of justification occurs through the power of Christ communicating the Holy Spirit. On this account he adds in Christ Jesus, that is, through Christ Jesus. “For [in Christ Jesus] neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but a new creation” (Gal. 6:15). “Send forth your Spirit, they are created anew” (Ps 104:30). Moreover, not only are the habits of virtue Et quia quos praedestinavit hos et vocavit, scilicet per gratiam, ut dicitur Rom. VIII, 30, ideo subdit de praedestinatione, dicens quae, scilicet bona opera, praeparavit Deus. Nihil enim aliud est praedestinatio, quam praeparatio beneficiorum Dei, inter quae beneficia computantur et ipsa bona opera nostra. Dicitur autem Deus nobis aliqua praeparare, inquantum disposuit se nobis daturum. Ps. LXIV, 10: parasti cibum illorum, et cetera. Since “those he predestined he also called” through grace, as Romans 8 (30) expresses it, therefore he adds something concerning predestination, saying, which good works God has prepared. For predestination is nothing else than the pre-arrangement of God’s blessings, among which blessings our good works themselves are numbered. God is said to prepare something for us insofar as be disposes himself to give it to us. “Provide the land with grain, for you prepared it for this” (Ps 64:10). Sed ne aliquis intelligeret bona opera sic esse nobis praeparata a Deo, ut nihil ad illa per liberum arbitrium cooperaremur, ideo subdit ut in illis ambulemus, quasi dicat: sic nobis ea praeparavit, ut ea nos ipsi nobis per liberum arbitrium impleremus. Dei enim adiutores sumus, ut dicitur I Cor. III, 9. Propter quod dicebat de seipso apostolus I Cor. c. XV, 10: gratia eius in me vacua non fuit, sed abundantius omnibus laboravi, non ego autem, sed gratia Dei mecum. Signanter autem dicit ambulemus, ut designet boni operis profectum, secundum illud Io. XII, 35: ambulate, dum lucem habetis. Infra V, 8: ut filii lucis ambulate. Lest anyone imagine that good works are prepared for us by God in such a way that we do not cooperate in their realization through our free will, he annexes that we should walk in them. As though he said: Thus has he prepared them for us, that we might perform them for ourselves through our free will. “For we are God’s co-workers” (1 Cor 3:9). For this reason the Apostle said of himself: “By the grace of God, I am what I am. And his grace in me has not been in vain; rather I have worked harder than all of them—yet not I, but the grace of God that is with me” (1 Cor 15:10). He expressly said we should walk to designate a progress in good works, in line with that saying: “Walk while you have the light, so that darkness may not overtake you” (Jn 12:35); “Walk then as children of the light” (Eph 5:8).
CHAPTER 2
LECTURE 4Remember, then, that in the past [and] in the realm of flesh you, the Gentiles—called The Uncircumcision by those who call themselves The Circumcision, that handmade operation in the realm of flesh— [Remember] that at that time you were apart form the Messiah, excluded from the citizenship of Israel, strangers to the covenants based upon promise. In this world you were bare of hope and without God. But now you are [included] in the realm of the Messiah Jesus. Through the blood of the Messiah you who in the past stood far off have been brought near. Prosecuto beneficio Dei gentilibus exhibito quantum ad liberationem a peccato, hic recitat apostolus beneficium eis exhibitum a liberatione a statu gentilitatis. Circa quod duo facit. Once he has outlined God’s blessing to the Gentiles in freeing them from sin (2:1), the Apostle recalls the favor shown them in their liberation from the state of paganism. Concerning this he does two things: Primo commemorat conditionem status praeteriti;
secundo recitat beneficia eis exhibita in statu praesenti, ibi nunc autem in Christo Iesu, et cetera.First, he recounts the condition of their former state.
Secondly, he describes the blessings granted them in their present state (2:13).Circa primum duo facit. He does two things about the first: Primo commemorationis status praeteriti ponit exhortationem;
secundo ipsemet status praeteriti declarat conditionem, ibi quia aliquando, et cetera.First, he prefaces the recollections of their past state with an exhortation.
Secondly, be discusses the condition of the past state itself (2:11b).Dicit ergo propter quod, ut scilicet advertere possitis, quod omnia sint nobis data ex Dei gratia, memores estote. Deut. IX, 7: memento et ne obliviscaris quomodo ad iracundiam provocaveris dominum Deum tuum, et cetera. Deut. XVI, 3: memineris diei egressionis tuae de Aegypto, omnibus diebus vitae tuae. Thus he says For which cause, that you might advert to the fact that everything comes to us by God’s grace, be mindful: “Remember and do not forget how you provoked Yahweh your God in the dessert” (Deut 9:7). “That you may remember the day of your coming out of Egypt, all the days of your life” (Deut 16:3). Secundo cum dicit quia aliquando commemorat praeteriti status conditionem When he states that you, being heretofore Gentiles he recounts, in the second place, the condition of their past state: et primo quantum ad mala quae habebant;
secundo quantum ad bona quibus privabantur, ibi qui eratis illo in tempore, et cetera.First, as regards the evils they endured.
Secondly, as regards the goods of which they were deprived (2:12).Circa primum ponit tria mala. Primo gentilitatis crimen, quo idolis serviebant, cum dicit quia aliquando vos gentes eratis. I Cor. XII, 2: scitis quoniam cum gentes essetis, ad simulacra muta prout ducebamini euntes. Quidam vero libri habent: vos qui gentes eratis, et tunc pendet constructio usque ibi nunc autem in Christo Iesu, et cetera.
secundo recitat eorum carnalem conversationem, cum dicit in carne, id est carnaliter viventes. Rom. VIII, 8: qui autem in carne sunt, Deo placere non possunt.
tertio recitat contemptus eorum vilipensionem, qua a Iudaeis vilipendebantur. Unde dicit qui dicebamini praeputium, id est incircumcisio, ab ea, scilicet circumcisione, quae dicitur circumcisio manufacta in carne, id est a Iudaeis tali circumcisione circumcisis. Et dicit manufacta ad differentiam circumcisionis spiritualis, de qua dicitur Col. II, v. 11: in quo circumcisi estis circumcisione non manufacta in expoliatione corporis carnis, sed in circumcisione Christi consepulti ei in Baptismo. Et sequitur parum post: vos cum mortui essetis in delictis et praeputio carnis vestrae, convivificavit cum illo, condonans vobis omnia, et cetera.In reference to the first he exposes three evils. First was the crime of paganism, by which they were accustomed to worship idols; this he implies in that you being heretofore Gentiles. “You know that when you were heathens, you went to dumb idols according as you were led” (1 Cor 12:2). Some books have “You who were Gentiles” and omit everything until “But now in Christ Jesus...” (v. 13). Secondly, he discusses their carnal way of life, saying in the flesh, that is, living lustfully. “And they who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom 8:8). Thirdly, he speaks of the repugnance and contempt with which the Jews despised them. Hence he mentions who are called uncircumcision by that type of circumcision which is called circumcision in the flesh as the circumcised Jews performed this circumcision. He says made by hands to distinguish it from the spiritual circumcision spoken of in Colossians 2 (11-13): “In whom [Christ] you also were circumcised with a circumcision not hand-made, by putting off the body of the flesh, but in the circumcision of Christ, buried with him in baptism... And when you were dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, he has brought you to life together with him, forgiving you all offenses.” Deinde cum dicit qui eratis illo in tempore, etc., commemorat bona quibus privabantur, Next (v. 12), he recounts the good things of which they were deprived: et primo participatione sacramentorum;
secundo Dei cognitione, ibi et sine Deo in hoc mundo.First from a share in the sacraments.
Secondly, from a knowledge of God, at and without God in this world (v. 12).Circa primum ponit tria sacramenta, quorum participatione privabantur. Primo Christi dignitatem; unde dicit qui eratis illo in tempore sine Christo, id est sine promissione Christi, quae facta est Iudaeis. Ier. XXIII, 5: suscitabo David germen iustum, et cetera. Zach. IX, 9: exulta satis, filia Sion, iubila, filia Ierusalem, ecce rex tuus venit tibi iustus et salvator. Regarding the first he sets down three sacraments they were deprived of sharing in. They were, first of all, without the fundamental truth of Christ; whence he affirms that you were at that time without Christ, without the promise of a Christ as was made to the Jews. “I will raise up for David a just branch; and a king shall reign and shall be wise” (Jer 23:5). “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Sion, shout for joy, O daughter of Jerusalem: See, your King is coming to you, triumphant and victorious” (Zech 9:9). Secundo tangit societatem sanctorum, qua privabantur quamdiu in gentilitate permanebant, cum dicit alienati a conversatione Israel, quia scilicet Iudaeis cum gentibus non erat licitum conversari. Deut. VII, 2-3: non inibis cum eis foedus, non misereberis eorum, neque sociabis cum eis coniugia, et cetera. Io. IV, v. 9: non enim coutuntur Iudaei Samaritanis. Et quantum ad illos qui in Iudaismo recipiebantur contemptibiliter cum fiebant proselyti. Unde subditur et hospites testamentorum, quasi dicat: huiusmodi proselyti, quando convertebantur ad Iudaeos et fiebant proselyti, non sicut cives sed sicut hospites recipiebantur ad percipiendum testamenta Dei. Dicit autem testamentorum in plurali; quia Iudaeis vetus testamentum erat exhibitum, et novum erat promissum; quia, ut dicitur Eccli. XLIV, 25: testamentum suum confirmavit super caput Iacob; quod potest intelligi de veteri testamento. Promiserat enim Deus dare aliud testamentum. Bar. II, 35: statuam illis testamentum alterum sempiternum. Hoc autem reddidit illis, quorum adoptio est filiorum Dei et gloria et testamentum, ut dicitur Rom. IX, 4. They were deprived, in the second place, from the society of the saints as long as they remained in paganism. He says they were aliens from Israel’s way of life, since the Jews were not permitted to mix with the Gentiles. “You shall not make any league with them, nor show them mercy. Neither shall you make marriages with them” (Deut 7:2-3). “Jews do not communicate with Samaritans” (Jn 4:9). With respect to those who—not without contempt—were accepted into Judaism when they became proselytes he adds and strangers to the testaments. As though he asserted: These converts, when they went over to Judaism and became proselytes, were accepted to partake of God’s covenants as strangers rather than as citizens. He says testaments in the plural Ponit etiam aliud beneficium quo privabantur, scilicet spem futurorum bonorum, cum dicit promissionis spem non habentes; quia, ut dicitur Gal. III, 16, Abrahae dictae sunt promissiones, et semini eius. He also sets down another blessing of which they were deprived: the hope of future goods, when he says having no hope of the promise since “To Abraham were the promises made and to his seed” (Gal 3:16). Ulterius ponit summam damnificationem qua damnificantur, scilicet ob Dei ignorantiam, ibi et sine Deo in hoc mundo, id est sine cognitione Dei. Ps. LXXV, 2: notus in Iudaea Deus: non autem gentibus, ut dicitur I Thess. IV, 5: non in passione desiderii, sicut et gentes, quae ignorant Deum; quod tamen intelligitur de cognitione quae est per fidem. Nam de cognitione naturali dicitur Rom. I, 21: qui cum cognovissent Deum, non sicut Deum glorificaverunt, et cetera. Finally, he writes of the greatest injury from which they suffered, ignorance of God. And without God in this world means without the knowledge of God. “God has shown himself in Judah” (Ps 76:2), but not among the Gentiles: “Not in the passion of lust, like the Gentiles that do not know God” (1 Thes 4:5). This must be understood of the knowledge obtainable through faith, for Romans 1 (21) speaks of their natural knowledge: “Although they knew God, they did not glorified him as God or give him thanks.” Consequenter cum dicit nunc autem in Christo, etc., commemorat beneficia eis exhibita in statu conversionis per Christum. Circa quod duo facit, After this he recalls the blessings offered them through Christ in their [present] condition after conversion. Concerning this he does two things: quia primo ostendit quomodo facti sunt participes bonorum quibus ante privabantur;
secundo ostendit quod ad illa bona non sicut hospites, sed sicut cives recipiuntur, ibi ergo non estis hospites, et cetera.First, he shows how they were made partakers of the goods previously denied them.
Secondly, he shows that their participation in those goods is not that of strangers but of citizens (2:19).Prima iterum in duas, The first part again has two sections: quia primo commemorat huiusmodi beneficia in generali;
secundo in speciali, ibi in ipso enim est pax nostra, et cetera.First, he depicts these blessings in a general way.
Secondly, he specifies them (2:14).Dicit ergo primo: dixi quod in illo tempore eratis sine Christo, alienati a conversatione Israel, nunc autem, id est postquam conversi estis ad Christum, vos qui estis in Christo, id est qui ei adhaeretis per fidem et charitatem. I Io. IV, 16: qui manet in charitate, in Deo manet, et Deus in eo. Gal. ult.: in Christo enim Iesu neque circumcisio aliquid valet, neque praeputium, sed nova creatura. With respect to the first: I have mentioned that in former times you were without Christ, alienated from Israel’s way of life. But now, after you have been converted to Christ, you are in Christ Jesus, intimately united to him through faith and love. “He who remains in love remains in God, and God in him” (1 Jn 4:16). “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but a new creature” (Gal 6:15). Vos, inquam, qui aliquando eratis longe, id est elongati a Deo, non loco, sed merito, Ps. CXVIII, 155: longe a peccatoribus salus, et a conversatione sanctorum et participatione testamentorum, ut dictum est, iam facti estis prope, Deo scilicet et sanctis eius, et testamentis. Is. LX, 4: filii tui de longe venient, et cetera. Mc. VIII, 3: quidam enim ex eis, scilicet gentibus, de longe venerunt, scilicet de regione dissimilitudinis et statu gentilitatis. Vos autem modo facti estis prope, scilicet in sanguine Christi, id est per sanguinem eius, quo vos Christus attraxit. Io. XII, 32: ego si exaltatus fuero a terra, omnia traham ad meipsum. Et hoc propter nimiam charitatem, quae potissime in morte crucis manifestatur. Ier. XXXI, 3: in charitate perpetua dilexi te, ideo attraxi te miserans. You, I say, who some time were afar off, severed from God, not by space but by what you deserved, because it is said: “Keep distant from the wicked your salvation” (Ps 119:155), as well as association with the saints and a share in the covenants, as has already been said. Now you are made near to God and to his saints and covenants. “Your sons shall come from afar and your daughters shall be carried in arms” (Is 60:4). “For some of them,” namely, the Gentiles, “have come from far away” (Mk 8:3), from the land of distortion
CHAPTER 2
LECTURE 5For [we confess]
He is in person the peace between us.
He has made both [Gentiles and Jews] into one.
For he has broken down the dividing wall,
in his flesh [he has wiped out all] enmity.
He has abolished the law, [that is, only] the
commandments [expressed] in statutes.
[This was] to make peace by creating in his person
a single new man out of the two,
and to reconcile both to God
through the cross in one single body.
In his own person he has killed the enmity.
Indeed when he came he proclaimed good news:
“Peace to you who are far and peace to those near!”
Through him and in one single Spirit
the two [of us] have free access to the Father.[Read Marcus Barth, “Law” (p. 287), “Priest and victim” (p. 298) along with Torrell, II Mâitre spirituel on present efficacy of Christ’s death; Barth: “Destruction and construction” (p. 306), “One new man” (p. 308).]
Commemoratis beneficiis collatis ipsis Ephesiis in generali per Christum, hic ea commemorat in speciali. Circa quod duo facit. Having recounted the blessings imparted to the Ephesians through Christ in a general way (2:13), he now recounts them in greater detail. Concerning this he makes two points: Primo ostendit qualiter appropinquaverunt populo Iudaico;
secundo qualiter propinquiores facti sunt Deo, ibi ut reconciliet ambos, et cetera.First, he shows how they have converged with the Jewish people.
Secondly, how they are drawn closer to God (2:16).Prima iterum in tres, The first has three divisions: quia primo ostendit causam appropinquationis,
secundo modum,
tertio finem. Secunda ibi et medium parietem, et cetera. Tertia ibi ut duos, et cetera.First, he reveals the cause of this convergence.
Secondly, its manner (2:14b).
Thirdly, its purpose (2:15b).Causa autem appropinquationis est Christus, propter quod dicit ipse enim est pax nostra, et cetera. Et est emphatica locutio ad maiorem rei expressionem, quasi dicat: bene dico quod facti estis prope, sed hoc factum est per Christum, quia ipse est pax nostra, id est causa pacis nostrae. Unde dicebat Io. XIV, 27: pacem meam do vobis. Hic autem modus loquendi fieri consuevit, quando totum quod est in effectu dependet ex causa, sicut cum dicimus de Deo quod ipse est salus nostra, quia quidquid salutis est in nobis causatur a Deo. Quia ergo quidquid pacis est in nobis causatur a Christo, et per consequens quidquid appropinquationis, quia homo quando pacificatus est cum alio, secure potest ambulare seu appropinquare ad ipsum, ideo dicit quod est pax nostra. Nam in eius nativitate Angeli annuntiaverunt pacem. Lc. II, 14: gloria in altissimis Deo, et in terra pax, et cetera. Ipso etiam Christo in corpore existente, mundus maximam pacem habuit, qualem ante non habuerat. Ps. LXXI, v. 7: orietur in diebus eius iustitia, et cetera. Ipse etiam resurgens pacem annuntiavit. Lc. ult.: dixit eis: pax vobis. Christ is the cause of this drawing together, for which reason he affirms For he is our peace, who has made both one. This is an emphatic way of speaking to better express the reality, as though he said: Rightly do I say that you are drawn near each other, but this occurs through Christ since he is the cause of our peace. “My peace I give you” (Jn 14:27). It is usual to adopt this way of speaking when the totality of the effect depends on its cause; for instance, we say that God himself is our salvation because whatever salvation is present in us is caused by God. In the same way, whatever peace we possess is caused by Christ and, as a result, whatever convergence [men have with one another]. For when a man is at peace with another he can securely walk towards or approach him. Hence, he is our peace. Angels announced peace at his birth: “Glory to God in the highest; and on earth peace to those he is pleased with” (Lk 2:14). Indeed, while Christ lived in the body the world enjoyed the greatest peace, the like of which it had never before possessed. “May the just man flourish in his days, and peace pour down till the moon be no more” (Ps 72:7). He himself proclaimed peace when he arose from the dead: “He said to them: ‘Peace be with you’” (Lk 24:36). Sequitur qui fecit utraque unum, quia scilicet Christus utrumque populum, videlicet Iudaeorum colentium Deum verum et gentilium, ab huiusmodi Dei cultura alienatorum, coniunxit in unum. Io. X, 16: alias oves habeo quae non sunt ex hoc ovili, etc., usque ibi: et fiet unum ovile et unus pastor. Ez. c. XXXVII, 22: rex unus erit omnibus imperans, et cetera. It follows that he has made both one, joining into unity both the Jews who worshiped the true God and the Gentiles who were alienated from God’s cult. “And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold; them also I must bring. And they shall bear my voice; and there shall be one fold and one shepherd” (Jn 10:16). “One king shall be king over them all. And they shall no more be two nations, neither shall they be divided any more into two kingdoms” (Ez 37:22). Modus autem appropinquationis ostenditur cum subdit et medium parietem, et cetera. Hic autem modus est per remotionem eius quod dividebat. Debemus autem ad intellectum litterae imaginari unum magnum campum, et multos homines ibi congregatos, in quo quidem per medium protendatur et elevetur unus paries dividens eos, ita quod non videatur populus unus, sed duo. Quicumque ergo removeret parietem, coniungeret illorum hominum congregationem in turbam unam, et efficeretur populus unus. The manner of convergence is revealed when he states and breaking down the middle barrier Sic intelligendum est quod hic dicitur. Mundus enim iste est sicut ager, Matth. XIII, 38: ager est mundus; hic autem ager, scilicet mundus, plenus est hominibus, Gen. I, 28: crescite, et multiplicamini, et replete terram. In isto autem agro est paries, quia quidam sunt ex una parte, quidam ex alia; hic autem paries potest dici lex vetus secundum carnales observantias, in qua Iudaei conclusi custodiebantur, ut dicitur Gal. c. III, 23: sub lege custodiebamur conclusi in eam fidem, quae revelanda erat. Cant. II, v. 9: ipse stat post parietem nostrum; quia videlicet Christus per veterem legem figurabatur. Christus autem hunc parietem removit, et ita cum nullum remaneret interstitium, factus est populus unus Iudaeorum et gentium. Et hoc est quod dicit: dico quod fecit utraque unum, hoc modo scilicet solvens medium parietem. What is said here should be understood in this way. For the world is likened to a field: “The field is the world” (Mt 13:38); this field of the world is crowded with men, “Increase and multiply, and fill the earth” (Gen 1:28). A barrier, however, runs down the field, some are on one side and the rest on the other. The Old Law can be termed such a barrier, its carnal observances kept the Jews confined: “Before the faith came, we were under the guardianship of the law, confined in anticipation of the faith which was to be revealed” (Gal 3:23). Christ was symbolized through the Old Law: “See, he stands behind our wall” (Cant. 2:9). Christ, however, has put an end to this barrier and, since no division remained, the Jews and the Gentiles became one people. This is what he says: I affirm that he has made both one by the method of breaking down the middle barrier. Parietem dico maceriae, non muri. Tunc enim est paries maceriae, quando lapides in eo non conglutinantur cemento, nec ad hoc erigitur, ut duret in perpetuum, sed usque ad tempus praefinitum. Vetus ergo lex est paries maceriae propter duo. Primo quia non conglutinabatur charitate, quae est quasi cementum conglutinans singulos sibi invicem, et omnes simul Christo. Infra IV, 3: solliciti servare unitatem spiritus in vinculo pacis. Vetus enim lex est lex timoris, inducens homines per poenas et comminationes ad observantias mandatorum. Et si qui, illo tempore legis, eam ex charitate observabant, iam pertinebant ad novum testamentum, ut dicit Augustinus, quod est lex amoris. Rom. VIII, 15: non enim accepistis spiritum servitutis iterum in timore, et cetera.
secundo, vetus lex est paries maceriae quia non fuit data ut perpetuo duraret, sed usque ad tempus praefinitum. Gal. IV, 1 ss.: quanto tempore haeres parvulus est, nihil differt a servo, cum sit dominus omnium, sed sub tutoribus et actoribus est usque ad praefinitum tempus a patre: ita et nos cum essemus, et cetera.I say a barrier of partition and not a wall. A barrier of partition is one in which the stones are not mortared together with cement; it is not built to last permanently but only for a specified time. The Old Law was a barrier of partition for two reasons. First, because it was not mortared together with charity which is, as it were, the cement uniting individuals among themselves and everyone together with Christ. “Be careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph 4:3). The Old Law is a law of fear, persuading men to observe its commands by punishments and threats. While that law was in force, those who kept it out of love belonged by anticipation, as Augustine holds, to the New Testament which is the law of love. Sed hic incidit quaestio quia dicit parietem maceriae solvens, contrarium dicitur Matth. V, 17: non veni solvere legem, sed adimplere. Respondeo. Dicendum est, quod in veteri lege erant praecepta moralia et caeremonialia. Moralia quidem praecepta Christus non solvit, sed adimplevit, superaddendo consilia, et exponendo ea quae Scribae et Pharisaei male intelligebant. Unde dicebat Matth. V, 19: nisi abundaverit iustitia vestra plus quam Scribarum, et cetera. Et iterum: dictum est antiquis: diliges proximum tuum, et odio habebis inimicum tuum. Ego autem dico vobis: diligite inimicos vestros, et cetera. Caeremonialia vero praecepta solvit quidem quantum ad eorum substantiam, sed adimplevit quantum ad illud quod figurabant, adhibens figuratum figurae. A problem arises here since he says breaking down the barrier of partition and, on the contrary, Matthew 5 (17) states: “Do not think that I have come to destroy the law or the prophets. I have not come to destroy, but to fulfill.” I reply. The Old Law contained both moral and ceremonial precepts. The moral commandments were not destroyed by Christ but fulfilled in the counsels he added and in his explanations of what the Scribes and Pharisees had wrongly interpreted. So he says in Matthew 5 (20): “Unless your justice abounds more than that of the Scribes and Pharisees, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” And further on: “You have heard that it has been said: ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you: Love your enemies; do good to those who hate you; and pray for those who persecute and calumniate you” (Mt 5:43-44). He abolished the ceremonial precepts with regard to what they were in themselves, but he fulfilled them with regard to what they prefigured, adding what was symbolized to the symbol. Est ergo intelligendum quod hic dicit solvens, scilicet quantum ad observantiam legis carnalis. Et solvere hoc, scilicet parietem maceriae, est solvere inimicitias quae erant inter Iudaeos et gentiles: quia isti volebant legem servare, illi vero minime, ex quo oriebatur inter eos ira et invidia. Sed certe has inimicitias Christus solvit in carne sua assumpta. Nam in eius nativitate statim pax hominibus annuntiata est. Lc. II, v. 14. Vel in carne sua, scilicet immolata, quia, ut dicitur infra V, 2: tradidit semetipsum pro nobis oblationem et hostiam Deo. In quo quidem sacrificio impleta sunt omnia illa sacrificia, et cessaverunt. Hebr. X, 14: una enim oblatione consummavit in sempiternum sanctificatos. It should be understood, therefore, that in saying breaking he refers to the observance of the carnal law. To break down this barrier of partition is to destroy the hostility between the Jews and Gentiles. The former wanted to observe the law and the latter bad little inclination to do so, Quid autem sit iste paries insinuat, dicens quod est lex mandatorum, quasi dicat: solvens parietem, hoc est legem mandatorum, et cetera. Dicitur autem lex vetus lex mandatorum, non quia aliae leges mandatis careant; nova enim lex mandata habet. Io. XIII, 34: mandatum novum do vobis. Sed propter duo: primo quidem propter magnum numerum mandatorum legalium, intantum quod ab hominibus servari non possunt, secundum illud Act. XV, 10: hoc est onus quod neque nos, neque patres nostri portare potuimus. Iob XI, v. 6: quod multiplex sit lex eius, et cetera. Vel dicitur mandatorum, id est, factorum. Rom. III, 27: ubi est ergo gloriatio tua? Exclusa est. Per quam legem? Factorum? Non, sed per legem fidei. Unde sicut Baptismus Ioannis dicitur Baptismus aquae, quia tantum exterius mundabat, interius autem non sanctificabat: ita et lex vetus dicitur lex factorum, quia praecipiebat tantum quid facere deberent, sed non conferebat gratiam, per quam ad legem implendam iuvarentur. Lex vero nova dirigit in agendis, praecipiendo, et iuvat ad implendum, gratiam conferendo. What that barrier was he implies when he says the law of commandments, as though he said: Breaking down the barrier which is the law of the commandments. The Old Law is termed the law of commandments, not because other laws lacked injunctions since the New Law has commandments: “A new commandment I give you” (Jn 13:34). There are two reasons why [this title is applied to the Old Law]. One is the great number of legal injunctions it contained, so many that men could not possibly keep them all, according to that text of Acts 15 (10): “Now, therefore, why tempt God to put a yoke upon the necks of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear?” And Job 11 (6): “That he would tell you the secrets of wisdom, which have multiple applications.” Or, it is called of commandments meaning “of works.” “Where then is your boasting? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith” (Rom 3:27). Thus the baptism of John was called a baptism of water since it would cleanse only externally and not sanctify interiorly. Likewise, the Old Law was termed of works be cause it ordained only what must be done, but did not confer the grace through which men would have been assisted in fulfilling the law. The New Law, on the other hand, regulates what must be done by giving commands, and it aids in fulfilling them by bestowing grace. Evacuans dico, sicut imperfectum evacuatur per perfectum, et umbra per veritatem. I Cor. XIII, 10: cum autem venerit quod perfectum est, evacuabitur quod ex parte est, scilicet imperfectio et umbra veteris legis, de qua Hebr. X, 1: umbram enim habens lex futurorum bonorum, et cetera. Et hoc decretis, id est, praeceptis novi testamenti, per quae excluditur lex. Lev. XXVI, v. 10: comedetis vetustissima veterum, id est, praecepta legis naturae simul cum nova lege; et, praeceptis eius susceptis, vetera proiicietis, id est caeremonialia praecepta veteris legis quantum ad eorum substantiam, ut dictum est. I affirm [that Christ in his flesh was] making void the law of commandments as the imperfect is made void by the perfect and the shadow by the truth. “When the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away” (1 Cor 13:10), that is, the imperfection and shadow of the Old Law of which Hebrews 10 (1) asserts: “The law has a shadow of the good things to come, not the very image of the things.” This happened by the decrees, referring to the precepts of the New Testament through which the law was annulled. Finem vero appropinquationis ostendit, dicens ut duos condat in se, et cetera. Qui quidem finis est ut dicti duo populi efficiantur unus populus. Quae autem uniuntur, oportet uniri in aliquo uno, et quia lex dividebat, non poterant in lege uniri; Christus autem in lege succedens, et fides eius (sicut veritas figurae) eos in semetipso condidit. Io. XVII, 22: ut sint unum, sicut et nos unum sumus. Matth. XVIII, 20: ubi enim sunt duo vel tres congregati in nomine meo, ibi ego sum in medio eorum. He reveals the purpose of the convergence when he states that he might make the two in himself into one new man. The end is that the aforementioned two peoples would be formed into one people. Whatever unites must come together in some unity, and since the law divided they could not be united in that law. But Christ took the place of the law, and faith in him, as the truth of those symbols, made them one in himself. “That they may be one as we also are one” (Jn 17:22); “For, where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Mt 18:20). Et hoc in uno novo homine faciens pacem, id est in semetipso Christo, qui dicitur novus homo propter novum modum suae conceptionis. Ier. XXXI, 22: creavit dominus novum super terram, foemina circumdabit virum. Item propter novitatem gratiae quam contulit. Gal. ult.: in Christo enim Iesu neque circumcisio aliquid valet, neque praeputium, sed nova creatura. Infra IV, 23: renovamini spiritu mentis vestrae, et induite novum hominem, qui, et cetera. Item propter nova mandata quae attulit. Io. XIII, 34: mandatum novum do vobis, ut diligatis invicem, et cetera. This is into one new man, making peace. That is, into Christ himself who is called a new man on account of the new manner of his conception: “For the Lord has created a new thing upon the earth: a woman shall encompass a man” (Jer 31:22). Another factor is the novelty of the grace he bestows: “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any meaning, but a new creature” (Gal 6:15); “and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man who is created according to God” (Eph 4:23). [Christ is also a new man] on account of the new commands he sets forth: “A new commandment I give you: that you love one another as I have loved you” (Jn 13:34). Et licet ista videatur esse intentio apostoli, tamen in Glossa paries duplicatur: quia ex parte Iudaeorum ponitur lex quasi obstaculum, ex parte vero gentium est idololatria. This appears to correspond to the Apostle’s intention, yet in a Gloss the barrier is duplicated. On the side of the Jews the law is set up as the obstacle, while on the Gentile’s side it is idolatry. Consequenter cum dicit ut reconciliet ambos, etc., ostendit qualiter Deo appropinquaverunt. Circa quod duo facit. When he states and might reconcile both to God in one body, he discloses how both draw near to God. Concerning this he does two things: Primo manifestat eorum reconciliationem ad Deum;
secundo ponit manifestationem reconciliationis, ibi et veniens evangelizavit, et cetera.First, he treats of their reconciliation to God.
Secondly, he writes of the manifestation of this reconciliation (2-17).Sciendum est quod dilectio proximi est via ad pacem Dei; quia ut dicitur I Io. IV, 20: qui enim non diligit fratrem suum quem videt, Deum quem non videt quomodo potest diligere? Et Augustinus dicit quod nullus putet habere pacem cum Christo, si discors fuerit cum Christiano. Primo ergo ponit pacem hominum invicem factam per Christum, et exinde pacem hominum ad Deum. Propter quod dicit ut reconciliet ambos, iam unitos, in uno corpore Ecclesiae, scilicet in Christo. Rom. XII, 5: multi unum corpus sumus in Christo. Reconciliet, inquam, Deo per fidem et charitatem. II Cor. V, 19: Deus erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi. It should be realized that love of neighbor is the way to peace with God; for, as is mentioned in 1 John 4 (20): “He who does not love his brother whom he sees, how can he love God whom he does not see?” Let no one pretend he has peace with Christ, Augustine asserts, if he quarrels with another Christian. Et hoc fecit per crucem, interficiens inimicitias in semetipso, quia Iudaeorum et gentilium, quae erant per legem, inimicitias interfecit, implens figuras veteris testamenti; sed inimicitias quae erant inter Deum et homines per peccatum interfecit in semetipso, quando per mortem crucis delevit peccatum. Gal. I, v. 4: qui dedit semetipsum pro peccatis nostris. Hebr. IX, 28: Christus semel oblatus est ad multorum exhaurienda peccata. Dicit ergo: interficiens inimicitias, id est peccata, in semetipso, in immolatione corporis sui. Col. I, 20: pacificans per sanguinem crucis eius, sive quae in caelis, sive quae in terris sunt. Rom. V, 10: cum inimici essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem filii eius. Item Col. I, 19: in Christo complacuit omnem plenitudinem habitare, et per eum reconciliare omnia in ipso. Quia ergo Christus satisfecit sufficienter pro peccatis nostris, consequens fuit ut soluto pretio fieret reconciliatio. He achieved this by the cross, killing the enmities in himself. In fulfilling the Old Testament symbols, he killed the hostility that had arisen through the law between the Jews and the Gentiles. But the hostility that existed between God and men through sin, he killed in himself when he blotted out sin through the death of the Cross. He “who gave himself for our sins” (Gal 1-4); “Christ was offered once to carry away the sins of many” (Heb. 9:28). Therefore, he says killing the enmities, that is, sins, in himself, meaning in the immolation of his own body. “Making peace through the blood of his cross, both as to the things that are on earth and the things that are in heaven” (Col 1:20). “When we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son” (Rom 5:10). “God wanted all fullness to dwell in him, and through him, to reconcile all things unto himself’ (Col 1:19-20). Since Christ satisfied sufficiently for our sins, reconciliation occurred as a consequence of his having paid the price (cf. 1 Cor 6:20). Manifestationem vero huius reconciliationis ponit, dicens: et veniens evangelizavit, et cetera. The manifestation of the reconciliation is set down in And coming, he preached where he touches on: Ponit autem primo pacis seu reconciliationis Annuntiationem;
secundo pacis causam et rationem, ibi: quoniam per ipsum habemus accessum et cetera.First, the proclamation of peace or reconciliation.
Secondly, the cause and reason of this peace (2:18).Est ergo manifesta Dei reconciliatio ad hominem per Christum, quia ipse Christus non solum reconciliavit nos Deo, et interfecit inimicitias, sed etiam veniens, scilicet in carne, evangelizavit, id est annuntiavit, pacem. Vel veniens post resurrectionem, quando stetit in medio discipulorum, et dixit eis: pax vobis, Lc. ult., Is. LXI, 1: ad annuntiandum mansuetis misit me, et cetera. Et Is. LII, 7: quam pulchri pedes supra montes annuntiantis et praedicantis pacem, annuntiantis bonum, praedicantis salutem, et cetera. The reconciliation of God to man through Christ has been made known because Christ himself not only reconciled us to God and destroyed the hostilities, but also coming in the flesh he preached and proclaimed peace. Or, coming after the resurrection when he stood in the midst of the disciples and said. “Peace be to you” (Lk 24:36). “He has sent me to bring good news to the afflicted, to heal the brokenhearted” (Is 61:1). “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger who preaches peace, brings good news and announces salvation” (Is 52:7). Evangelizavit, inquam, non uni populo tantum, sed vobis gentibus qui longe fuistis, quibus etsi non in persona propria, tamen per apostolos suos annuntiavit pacem. Matth. ult.: euntes ergo docete omnes gentes, baptizantes, et cetera. Is. XXXIII, 13: audite, qui longe estis, quae fecerim, et cognoscite, et cetera. Et pacem his qui prope, supple annuntiavit Christus in persona propria. Rom. XV, 8: dico enim Christum Iesum ministrum fuisse circumcisionis propter veritatem Dei, ad confirmandas promissiones patrum. Is. LIV, 15: ecce, accola veniet qui non erat mecum, advena quondam tuus adiungetur tibi. He preached, I say, not to one people only but to you Gentiles that were afar off; although not in his own person, nonetheless he proclaimed peace to you through his Apostles. “Go, therefore, and teach all nations” (Mt 28:19). “Hear, you that are far off, what I have done: and you that are near, know my strength” (Is 33:13). Christ in his own person announced the peace to them that were near. “For I say that Christ became a servant of the circumcised to show God’s truthfulness, to confirm the promises made to the patriarchs” (Rom 15:8). [Is 54:15 Vulgate misses point]. Causam autem pacis et formam ostendit dicens quoniam per ipsum habemus accessum ambo, id est, duo populi, in uno spiritu, id est, uniti unione spiritus sancti. Infra IV, 3: solliciti servare unitatem spiritus, et cetera. I Cor. XII, 11: haec autem omnia operatur unus atque idem spiritus, et cetera. Sic autem habemus accessum ad patrem per Christum, quoniam Christus operatur per spiritum sanctum. Rom. VIII, 9: si quis autem spiritum Christi non habet, hic non est eius. Et ideo quidquid fit per spiritum sanctum, etiam fit per Christum. He indicates the cause and form of peace by saying For by him we have access both, that is, the two peoples, in one Spirit, meaning we are joined by the union of the Holy Spirit. “Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace” (Eph 4:3). “One and the same Spirit produces all these” (1 Cor 12:11). The way we enjoy access to the Father is through Christ since Christ works through the Holy Spirit. “Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to him” (Rom 8:9). Hence, whatever happens through the Holy Spirit also occurs through Christ. Per hoc etiam quod dicit, ad patrem, intelligendum est quod etiam pertinet ad totam Trinitatem, quia propter essentiae unitatem in patre est filius et spiritus sanctus, et in spiritu sancto est pater et filius. Ideo cum dicit ad patrem, specialiter ostendit quod quidquid filius habet, a patre habet, et ab eo etiam se habere recognoscit. When he says to the Father, [our access] also must be understood as pertaining to the whole Trinity. For, by reason of the unity of the Divine Essence, the Son and the Holy Spirit are in the Father, and the Father and the Son are in the Holy Spirit. In saying to the Father he especially shows that whatever the Son possesses he has from the Father, and that he recognizes he has it from the Father.
CHAPTER 2
LECTURE 6Accordingly you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God. You are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, the keystone being he Messiah Jesus himself. The whole construction, fitted together in him, grows in the Lord into a holy temple. In him you, too, are being built together so as to be a dwelling of God in the Spirit.
[Read Marcus Barth, “keystone” (p. 317, #2).]Ostenso supra quod ad spiritualia beneficia simul admissae sunt gentes cum Iudaeis hic ostendit quod in illis beneficiis gentiles non sunt minoris dignitatis quam sunt ipsi Iudaei, sed aeque plenarie ad Christi beneficia sint admissi. Circa quod duo facit, Once he has made it clear that the Gentiles have been admitted to spiritual blessings together with the Jews (2:13), he goes on to teach that in these blessings the Gentiles are not of less eminence than the Jews themselves; they enjoy a completely equal access to Christ’s blessings. In reference to this be does two things: quia primo proponit intentum,
secundo manifestat propositum per exemplum, ibi superaedificati, et cetera.First, he presents what he has in mind.
Secondly, he clarifies this presentation by an example (2:20).Circa primum duo facit. Regarding the first he makes two points: Primo excludit id quod erat in statu praeterito a statu praesenti;
secundo concludit id quod competit praesenti statui, ibi sed estis cives, et cetera.First, he excludes what was [true of] their past state from their present state.
Secondly, he concludes to what is fitting for their present state (2:19b).Quia ergo apostolus concludendo inducit hoc quod dicit ergo iam, etc., considerandum est, quod similitudo sequitur ex praemissis: primo quidem ex hoc quod ambo coniuncti, sunt Deo reconciliati;
secundo quod ambo habent accessum in uno spiritu ad patrem. Quia ergo simul sunt configurati toti Trinitati: patri ad quem habent accessum, filio per quem, spiritui sancto in quo uno accedunt, in nullo ergo deficiunt a spiritualium bonorum participatione.In drawing a conclusion, the Apostle says Now therefore you are no more strangers and foreigners, and it should be recognized that a similar conclusion follows from the premises. First, indeed, from this, that both [Jews and Gentiles] are united and are reconciled to God. In the second place, they both have access in one Spirit to the Father. Together they are conformed to the whole Trinity; to the Father whom they approach, to the Son through whom, and to the Holy Spirit in whom they have access in unity. Hence, they in no way lack a share in spiritual goods. Ad intellectum autem litterae sciendum est, quod collegium fidelium quandoque in Scripturis vocatur domus, secundum illud I Tim. III, 15: ut scias quomodo in domo Dei oporteat te conversari, quae est Dei Ecclesia. Quandoque autem vocatur civitas, secundum illud Ps. CXXI, 3: Ierusalem quae aedificatur ut civitas. Civitas enim habet collegium politicum: domus autem oeconomicum, inter quae quidem duplex differentia invenitur. Nam qui sunt de collegio domus communicant sibi in actibus privatis; qui vero sunt de collegio civitatis, communicant sibi in actibus publicis. Item, qui sunt in collegio domus, reguntur ab uno qui vocatur paterfamilias; sed qui sunt in collegio civitatis reguntur a rege. Ita enim est paterfamilias in domo, sicut rex in regno. To understand the text it must be realized that the community of the faithful are sometimes referred to as a house in the Scriptures: “that you may know how to behave thyself in the household of God, which is the church of the living God” (1 Tim. 3:15). At other times it is called a city: “Jerusalem, which is built as a city” (Ps 121:3). A city possesses a political community whereas a household has a domestic one, Sic igitur collegium fidelium aliquid habet de civitate, et aliquid de domo. Sed si consideretur rector collegii, pater est Matth. VI, v. 9: pater noster, qui es in caelis, et cetera. Hier. c. III, 19: patrem vocabis me, et post me ingredi non cessabis; et sic collegium est domus. Si vero ipsos subditos consideres, sic civitas est, quia communicabant sibi in actibus praecipuis, scilicet fidei, spei et charitatis. Et hoc modo si fideles considerentur in se, est collegium civitatis; si vero rector collegii attendatur, est collegium domus. The community of the faithful contains within it something of the city and something of the home. If the ruler of the community is thought of, he is a father: “Our Father, who art in heaven” (Mt 6:9); “I though you would me Father and would not turn from following me” (Jer 3:19). In this perspective, the community is a home. But if you consider the subjects themselves, it is a city since they have in common with one another the particular acts of faith, hope and charity. In this way, if the faithful are considered in themselves, the community is a civil one; if, however, the ruler is thought of, it is a domestic community. Et ideo apostolus duo verba ponit hic, scilicet hospites et advenae. Hoc enim sunt hospites ad domum, quod advenae ad civitatem. Hospes enim dicitur quasi extraneus a domo. Eccli. XXIX, 31: vita nequam, hospitandi de domo in domum. Advena vero est qui extraneus venit ad civitatem. Ac si dicat apostolus: olim eratis extranei a collegio fidelium, sicut hospites a domo, et advenae ad civitatem, quemadmodum et proselyti ad legem veterem; sed nunc non est ita, quia iam non estis hospites, et cetera. Is. LIV, 15: ecce accola veniet qui non erat mecum, advena quondam tuus adiungetur tibi. This is why the Apostle writes the two words here: strangers and foreigners. For what the stranger is to the home, that the foreigner is to the city. A stranger is an outsider, as it were, of a family: “It is a miserable life to go from house to house, and where you are a guest you may not open your mouth” (Sir 29:24). A foreigner is as an alien to the city into which he comes. As though the Apostle said: Formerly you were estranged from the community of believers, as strangers to a home and foreigners to a state—and as the proselytes were to the Old Law—but this is true no longer, for you are no more strangers and foreigners. [Is 54:15 Vulgate misses the point.] Consequenter cum dicit sed estis cives sanctorum, etc.; concludit quod convenit statui praesenti, dicens sed estis cives sanctorum, etc., quasi dicat: quia collegium fidelium dicitur civitas in comparatione ad subditos, et domus in comparatione ad rectorem, collegium, ad quod vocati estis, est civitas sanctorum et domus Dei. Ps. LXXXVI, v. 3: gloriosa dicta sunt de te, civitas Dei. Unde Augustinus: duas civitates faciunt duo amores. Nam amor Dei usque ad contemptum sui, scilicet hominis amantis, facit civitatem Ierusalem caelestem, amor vero sui usque ad contemptum Dei, facit civitatem Babylonis. Quilibet ergo vel est civis sanctorum, si diligit Deum usque ad contemptum sui, Prov. ult.: omnes domestici eius vestiti sunt duplicibus, si vero diligit se usque ad contemptum Dei, est civis Babylonis. Next (v, 19b), he draws the conclusion of what their present state is, stating but you are fellow citizens with the saints and the domestics of God. As if he had said: Since the community of the faithful is termed a city in relation to its subjects, and a home relative to its ruler, the assembly to which you are called is the city of the saints and the house of God. “He who made perfect the glorious dwellings of Jacob speaks in you, city of God:” (Ps 87:3). Hence Augustine remarks: “Two loves have formed two cities. For the love of God, even to the “contempt of self,” namely, of the man loving, “builds the heavenly city of Jerusalem. But the love of self, even to the contempt of God, builds the city of Babylon. Consequenter cum dicit superaedificati, etc., manifestat propositum. Consuetum est in Scripturis quod in figura, quae metonymia dicitur, continens ponatur pro contento, sicut quandoque domus pro his qui sunt in domo: secundum hunc ergo modum loquitur apostolus de his qui sunt in domo Dei, scilicet de fidelibus, sicut de una domo, et comparat eos aedificio. Et circa hoc duo facit, Consequently, when he says built upon the foundation of the Apostles, he clarifies what has been said. It is customary in the Scriptures that the figure, called metonymy, is used where the container is substituted for what it contains, as a house sometimes refers to those who are in the house. The Apostle employs this figure of speech concerning those who are in the house of God, the faithful; as though they were one house, he compares them to a building. Regarding this he does two things: quia primo proponit intentum,
secundo ostendit quod huius aedificii participes facti sunt ipsi Ephesii, ibi in quo et vos coaedificamini, et cetera.First, he sets down what he intended.
Secondly, he shows that the Ephesians themselves have become parts of this building (2:22).Circa primum duo facit. Concerning the first he does two things: Primo proponit huius aedificii fundamentum;
secundo ipsius constructionem seu complementum, ibi in quo omnis aedificatio constructa, et cetera.First, he describes the foundation of this building.
Secondly, its construction or completeness (2:21).Fundamentum autem ponit duplex: unum secundarium, et aliud principale. Secundarium quidem fundamentum sunt apostoli et prophetae. Et quantum ad hoc dicit eos non esse hospites, sed cives, qui iam pertinent ad aedificium spirituale, utpote superaedificati supra fundamentum apostolorum et prophetarum, id est, qui sunt apostoli et prophetae, id est, super doctrinam eorum. Vel aliter: supra fundamentum apostolorum et prophetarum, id est, supra Christum qui est fundamentum apostolorum et prophetarum; quasi dicat: in eodem fundamento superaedificati estis in quo apostoli et prophetae sunt aedificati, qui ex Iudaeis fuerunt. He writes of two foundations: one is primary and another secondary. Hae autem expositiones duae tantum quo ad verba differunt; sed prima convenientior est, quia si alia convenientior esset, tunc pro nihilo adiungeret ipso summo angulari lapide Christo Iesu, cum ipse Iesus sit summum fundamentum. Secundum ergo primum modum magis consonat, ita tamen quod praecipuus lapis et summum fundamentum sit Christus. Quantum vero ad sententiam nihil differunt, quia idem est dicere Christum esse fundamentum, et doctrinam apostolorum et prophetarum, cum Christum tantum, non seipsos, praedicaverint; unde accipere eorum doctrinam est accipere Christum crucifixum. I Cor. I, 23: nos autem praedicamus Christum crucifixum idest I Petr. I, 12: quibus revelatum est, quia non sibi ipsis, et cetera. Item I Cor. II, 16: nos autem sensum Christi habemus. These two interpretations only differ in words. Yet the first is more suited [to the context]; if the second was the better one there would be no point in adding Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone since he would be the principal foundation. Hence this is more in harmony with the first; although Christ would be both the chief stone and the principal foundation. In meaning, however, they are in no way different since it is the same to say that Christ is the foundation, and the teaching of the Apostles and Prophets is; after all, they proclaimed Christ alone, and not themselves. To accept their doctrine is to accept Christ crucified: “We preach Christ crucified” (1 Cor 1:23); and “We have the mind of Christ” (1 Cor 2:16). 1 Peter 1 (12) affirms [of the Prophets]: “It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, in the things which are have been announced to you by those who preached the good news to you.” Notandum est quod apostoli dicuntur fundamenta. Ps. LXXXVI, 1: fundamenta eius in montibus sanctis. Is. LIV, 11: fundabo te in sapphiris, id est, in caelestibus viris. Expresse autem dicuntur fundamenta Apoc. XXI, 14: murus civitatis habens fundamenta duodecim, et in ipsis nomina duodecim apostolorum. Qui intantum dicuntur fundamenta, inquantum eorum doctrina Christum annuntiant. Matth. XVI, 18: super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam. Notice that the Apostles are designated as foundations: “O city founded by him on the holy mountains” (Ps 87:1). I will lay your foundations with sapphires” (Is 54:11), that is, with saintly men. In the Apocalypse 21 (14) they are expressly called foundations: “And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.” They are referred to as foundations to the degree that their doctrine proclaims Christ. “Upon this rock I will build my Church” (Mt 16:18). Dicit autem apostolorum et prophetarum, ut designet, quod utraque doctrina est necessaria ad salutem. Matth. XIII, 52: Scriba doctus in regno caelorum similis est homini patrifamilias, qui profert de thesauro suo nova et vetera. Item ut ostendat concordiam inter utramque, alterius ad alteram, dum idem est utriusque fundamentum. Nam quod prophetae praedixerunt futurum, apostoli praedicaverunt factum. Rom. I, 1 s.: Paulus servus Iesu Christi, vocatus apostolus, segregatus in Evangelium Dei, quod ante promiserat per prophetas suos. Both Apostles and Prophets are alluded to so that he might indicate that the doctrine of both is necessary for salvation. “Therefore, every scribe instructed in the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings forth out of his treasure new things and old” (Mt 13:52). Also, that he might show the harmony between the two, of the one with the other, since there is an identical foundation to both. What the Prophets foretold was to come, the Apostles proclaimed as accomplished. “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he had promised before by his prophets in the holy scriptures, concerning his Son” (Rom 1: 1-3). Principale vero fundamentum tantum est Christus Iesus, et quantum ad hoc dicit ipso summo, et cetera. Ubi tria dicit de eo, scilicet quod sit lapis, quod angularis, et quod summus. Christ Jesus alone is the principal foundation, in reference to this he says himself being the chief cornerstone. Here he states three things about him; he is a stone, is placed at the corner, and is the chief one. Lapis quidem est propter fundamenti firmitatem. Unde dicitur Matth. VII, 25, quod domus quae fundata erat supra petram, firmiter aedificata erat, intantum quod nec pluvia, nec flumina, nec venti potuerunt eam destruere. Non sic autem de domo fundata super arenam. Dan. II, 45: lapis abscissus de monte sine manibus. Angularis autem dicitur propter utriusque coniunctionem; nam ut in angulo duo parietes uniuntur, sic in Christo populus Iudaeorum et gentium uniti sunt. Ps.: lapidem quem reprobaverunt aedificantes, hic factus est in caput anguli. Act. IV, 11 s.: hic est lapis qui reprobatus est a vobis aedificantibus, qui factus est in caput anguli, et non est in aliquo alio salus. Et hoc idem de se introducit Matth. XXI, 42: numquid legistis in Scripturis: lapidem quem reprobaverunt aedificantes, hic factus est in caput anguli, et cetera. Summus autem dicitur propter dignitatis celsitudinem. Is. XXVIII, 16: ecce ego mittam in fundamentis Sion lapidem angularem, probatum, pretiosum, in fundamento fundatum. He is a stone on account of the strength of the foundation. Whence Matthew 7 (25) speaks of the house founded on a rock and built solidly; neither rains, nor floods, nor winds could destroy it. Such was not the case with the house built on sand. “You saw a stone cut out of the mountain without a hand being put to it” (Dan. 2:45). He is called a comer-stone on account of the convergence of both [Jews and Gentiles]. As two walls are joined at the comer, so in Christ the Jewish and Pagan peoples are united. “The stone which the builders rejected became the cornerstone” (Ps 118:22): “This is the stone rejected by you, the builders, which became the cornerstone. And there salvation in no one else” (Acts 4:11-12). And Christ applies this text to himself in Matthew 21 (42): “Have you never read in the Scriptures: The stone which the builders rejected has become the cornerstone?” He is referred to as the chief one by reason of his heavenly dignity: “See, I am laying a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a cornerstone, a precious stone, a foundation stone” (Is 28:16). Sed non est idem de fundamento in aedificio spirituali et in aedificio materiali. Materiale namque aedificium fundamentum habet in terra, et ideo oportet ut principalius fundamentum sit magis infimum. Spirituale vero aedificium fundamentum habet in caelo, et ideo oportet quod fundamentum quanto est principalius, tanto sit sublimius: ut sic imaginemur civitatem quamdam descendentem de caelo, cuius fundamentum in caelo existens, et aedificium demissum ad nos, videatur inferius; secundum illud Apoc. XXI, v. 2: vidi civitatem sanctam Ierusalem descendentem de caelo, et cetera. The foundation of a spiritual edifice contrasts with that of a material building. For a material building rests on a foundation in the earth, the more important the foundation is, the deeper must it be. A spiritual structure, on the other hand, has its foundation in heaven; as a result, the more principal the foundation, the higher it necessarily Is Thus we could imagine a city, as it were, coming down from heaven with its foundation in heaven and the building itself appearing to come downward towards us below, according to that passage of the Apocalypse 21 (2): 1 John, saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God.” Consequenter cum dicit in quo omnis aedificatio, etc., agit de constructione aedificii. In qualibet autem aedificii constructione quatuor requiruntur. Primo aedificii fundatio, secundo constructio, tertio augmentatio, quarto consummatio: quae quidem breviter tangit. Next (v. 21), he treats of the building’s construction. In erecting any building four stages are requisite. First is the foundation of the edifice, second is the construction, third its increase, and fourth is the completion. Primum, cum dicit in quo, scilicet fundamento, qui Christus est principaliter, et doctrina apostolorum et prophetarum secundario, quia, ut dicitur I Cor. III, 11: fundamentum aliud nemo potest ponere praeter id, et cetera.
secundo vero tangit secundum, cum dicit omnis aedificatio constructa. Et quidem si intelligatur allegorice, designat ipsam Ecclesiam, quae tunc construitur quando homines ad fidem convertuntur. Si autem moraliter intelligatur, significat animam sanctam, et tunc eiusmodi aedificatio construitur, quando bona opera superaedificantur super Christum. Prov. XIV, 1: sapiens mulier aedificat domum suam. I Cor. III, 10: unusquisque videat quomodo superaedificet. In hoc ergo fundamento, scilicet Christo, omnis aedificatio spiritualis construitur, Iudaeorum vel gentilium, a Deo per auctoritatem. Ps. CXXVI, 1: nisi dominus aedificaverit domum, et cetera. Hebr. III, v. 4: omnis namque domus fabricatur ab aliquo, qui autem omnia creavit, Deus est. Sed instrumentaliter construitur aedificium vel ab homine qui seipsum aedificat, vel a praelatis.In saying in whom he designates the foundation which principally is Christ and secondarily the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets: “For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus” (1 Cor 3:11). He discusses the second briefly in all the building being framed together. Understood allegorically, this signifies the Church herself which is built up when men are converted to the faith. Taken morally Tertium tangit cum dicit crescit in templum, etc.; quod quidem fit quando multiplicantur qui salvi fiunt. Act. VI, 7: verbum domini crescebat, et multiplicabatur numerus discipulorum in Ierusalem valde. Crescit etiam quando homo crescit in bonis operibus, et in gratia crescit quantum ad hoc, quod fit templum sanctum. Templum enim a Deo inhabitatur, et ideo oportet quod sit sanctum. Ps. XLV, 5: sanctificavit tabernaculum suum altissimus. Et quia nos debemus inhabitari a Deo, ut Deus in nobis habitet, ad hoc nos parare debemus, ut sancti simus. I Cor. III, 16: nescitis quia templum Dei estis, et spiritus Dei habitat in vobis; Apoc. c. XXI, 3: ecce tabernaculum Dei cum hominibus, et habitabit cum eis. He touches on the third when he states grows up into an holy temple; this happens when the number of those saved increases. “The word of the Lord continued to spread, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem” (Acts 6:7). It also grows when a man makes progress in good works, and he grows in grace to the degree that he becomes a holy temple. A temple is the dwelling plate of God and must be holy: “The Most High sanctifies his dwelling.” (Ps 46:5). Since we should be inhabited by God, that he might live in us, we ought to prepare ourselves in order to be holy. “Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?” (1 Cor 3:16). “See God’s dwelling is with men, and he will dwell with them” (Rev 21:3). Sed numquid statim a principio, cum charitatem habemus, templum Dei sumus? Respondeo. Dicendum est quod sic. Et quanto magis proficimus, tanto magis Deus habitat in nobis. Et ideo ad hoc aedificium, quarto, requiritur perfectio et consummatio, quod ostendit, cum dicit in domino. But are we not temples of God from the instant we possess charity? I reply that it is so. And the more we progress, so much the more will God dwell within us. Hence, the fourth requisite to this building is its perfection and completion, which he states to be in the Lord. Consequenter cum dicit in quo et vos, etc., ostendit quomodo gentiles facti sunt participes huius aedificii, dicens in quo, scilicet aedificio, non solum superaedificantur Iudaei, sed etiam vos Ephesii coaedificamini, id est ad similitudinem aliorum aedificamini. I Petr. II, 4 s.: ad quem accedentes lapidem vivum, ab hominibus quidem reprobatum, a Deo autem electum et honorificatum, et ipsi tamquam lapides vivi superaedificamini domus spiritualis. Et ideo subdit in habitaculum Dei, ut scilicet Deus in vobis inhabitet per fidem. Infra III, 17: habitare Christum per fidem in cordibus vestris. Hoc autem non potest fieri sine charitate, quia qui manet in charitate, in Deo manet, etc., I Io. IV, 16. Charitas autem datur nobis per spiritum sanctum. Rom. V, 5: charitas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris per spiritum sanctum qui datus est nobis. Ideo subdit in spiritu sancto. Finally (v. 22), he indicates how the Gentiles have become participants of the building. In which
Notes
St. Thomas’ text had “convivificavit” inserted in verse 1 after “vos”so that it read, similar to verse 5, “And he has restored you to life when you were dead...” This reading corresponds to a few Vulgate codices and was adopted in the edition of Pope Sixtus V, although it is now recognized as an interploation.
Return 1St. Thomas notes in his Commentary on St. John’s Gospel. Ch. 1, Lect. 5, that “world” has at least three different meanings in Scripture. Positively, it may refer to the world as created and ruled by God; or, as it is loved by God and brought to perfection through Christ’s redemption. Negatively, it refers to the world as perverted by sin and hostile to God, which is the meaning St. Paul gives it here. For the way in which these three are interrelated, and how the positive triumphs over the negative, cf. “Christian Humanism and St. John’s Theology of Life,” Review for Religious, March, 1964.
Return 1Following a common Biblical approach, Aquinas equates idol worship with slavery to the devil, cf. Ps 95:5; 105:33; Deut. 32:17; Bar. 4:3; 1 Cor. 10:20.
Return 1The “lower bodies” are identical with the “corruptible and mutable causes” mentioned in note 35 above. Aquinas never went into a detailed speculation about which ranks of angels governed which parts of the universe. In a general way, it could be said that the Middle Hierarchy would govern the celestial bodies—the nine celestial spheres (cf. Appendix)—and the Lower Hierarchy the terrestrial sphere made up of the four elements of fire, water, earth and air; cf. S.T. I, 63, 7c. Yet St. Thomas only mentions this as an opinion of others and does not seem attracted to it; he reminds us that the lowest possible angel transcends the whole of material creation by reason of its pure spirituality, ibid., 110, 1 ad 3.
Return 1St. John Damascene (c. 677-750), a priest and Doctor of the Church. The work referred to here is his celebrated De Fide Orthodoxa, 11, 4 (P.G. 94, 873-76).
Return 1This is the opinion of St. Gregory the Great in his Homilia 34 in Evangelia, P.L. 76, 1250. For a further discussion of this cf. S.T. I, 63, 7.
Return 1St. Thomas is borrowing this observation from Peter Lombard’s Collectanea, P.L. 192, Col 179. The Greek has the genitive tou pneumatos, “of the spirit.”
Return 1In these few sentences St. Thomas hints at his thought on concupiscence and original sin. It is not that these desires are sinful, for if the delight resulting from obtaining what we desire is not evil (S.T. I, 1-4), neither is the desire evil (ibid., 30, 2c). If man had not sinned his enjoyment of sensible goods would be even more intense than now; to be ruled by reason is not to become “angelized,” cf. I, 98, 2 ad 3. Yet, due to the lack of original justice (I-II, 82, 3), these desires can become causes of sin (I-II, 77). This is taking “concupiscentia” in the strictly theological sense, cf. K. Ralmer, “The Theological Concept of Concupiscentia,” Theological Investigations (Baltimore: Helicon, 1960), pp. 360-69. By “natural concupiscences” St. Thomas means that men share them with all animals, whereas the “concupiscence of knowledge,” or of reason, is proper to man only, cf. S.T. I-II, 30, 3c.
Return 1This same quotation is ascribed to St. Gregory in Lecture 5 of Ch. 3. 1 have not been able to locate it in his writings. It occurs word for word in the Exultet of the Easter Vigil Liturgy—“O inaestimabilis dilectio caritatis: ut servum. redimeres, filium tradidisti.” Liturgists seem to agree that the Exultet, or “Benedictio Cerei Gallicana,” owes its main inspiration to the fourth or fifth century; and it has been attributed both to St. Ambrose and Augustine. The earliest records we have of it are in the Gelasian Sacramentaries of the eighth century, cf. Schmidt, S.J., Hebdomada Sancta, Vol. 2 (Rome: Herder, 1957) pp. 639-45. Possibly St. Thomas was under the impression that St. Gregory had composed the Exultet. St. Thomas’ attribution of the quotation to St. Gregory more than likely springs from the common medieval custom of accepting Gregory as the author of the texts in the missal.
Return 1Cf. note 11 above. For St. Thomas “salus” is a divine action directed at the whole of man’s being. V. White, O.P., has pointed out how “holiness (sanctitas), health (sanitas), completeness (perfectio), and wholeness (integritas) are, in principle, virtually synonymous” for Aquinas; cf. his Soul and Psyche (London: Collins & Harvill, 1960), pp. 184-86. Notice how St. Thomas regularly speaks of “human salvation” or the “salvation of man” rather than the “salvation of souls.”
Return 1The act of faith is essentially an assent to God revealing himself to man (S.T. II-II, 1, 1c). The individual articles of faith are only the material determinations of this essential acceptance of Divinity revealing himself. St. Thomas brings out this interpersonal character of faith: “Everyone who believes assents to someone’s words; and thus, in any form of belief, it seems that it is the person to whose words the assent is given, who is of principal importance and, as it were, the end; while the individual truths through which one assents to that person are secondary” (ibid., 11, 1c). Cf. J. Mouroux, I Believe, The Personal Structure of Faith (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1959).
Return 1Cf. note 7 above. The “habitus” are creative powers by which men can perform different types of actions. For instance, the ability to solve complex mathematical problems is only acquired through training and practice; we cannot perform the requisite mental acts until we are conditioned by a learning process. The creative power which results from this conditioning is obviously distinct from the individual acts of solving mathematical problems, yet it is nonetheless real since if it did not exist we should have to go through the whole learning process before each act. Unlike such acquired powers, the supernatural virtues are infused by God, cf. S.T. I-II, 51, 4; 63, 4.
Return 1St. Thomas is using “sacramenta” here in the Patristic sense which does not limit it to the seven sacraments. All sanctifying mysteries are “Sacraments.” Christ, as the incarnation of God, is thus the sacrament of the Divine redemptive presence in the world of man; the Church—or as St. Thomas refers to it in discussing the second sacrament of which the pagans were deprived, the “society of the saints”—is the continuation of this sacramental presence. Aquinas probably owed this terminology to Hugh of St. Victor’s De Sacramentis, P.L. 176, 181 ff. Like Hugh, he discussed the “sacraments of nature” (In IV Sent., d. 1, q. 2, a. 6, sol. 3) which were even capable of symbolizing Christ (S.T. I-II, 103, 1; cf. note 154 below). The Old Law also had its sacraments (S.C.G. IV, 57; S.T. I-II, 101, 4; 102, 5; 103; 111, 61, 3 ad 2). On “sacramentum” as aholy secret or sanctifying mystery, cf. S.T. III, 60, 1 ad 2; and A. M. Roguet, O.P., les Sacrements (Paris: Desclée et Cie, 1945) pp. 257-M. A broader usage of the term “sacrament” is being restored to contemporary theology, cf. E. Schillebeeckx, O.P., Christ: The Sacrament of the Encounter with God (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1963).
Return 1The Douay-Rheims translation of the singular “testament” corresponds to neither the Vulgate nor the original Greek.
Return 1“Land of distortion” translates “regio dissimilitudinIs” This expression originated in Plato (cf. Politicus, 273 d), designating the region of becoming between pure being and absolute non-being. St. Augustine used it in his Confessions VII, 10 and it enjoyed wide vogue in the Middle Ages where it was associated with the “terra longinqua” of the prodigal son in Lk 15:13. In similar fashion St. Thomas here links it with the “de longe venerunt” of Mk. 8:3. The Christian concept of sin distorting man’s likeness to God is what it mainly implies. Cf. E. Gilson, The Mystical Theology of St. Bernard (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1940) pp. 33-59; and note 43 on pp. 224-25. Also P. Courcelle, “Tradition neo-platonicienne et traditions chritiennes de la région de dissemblance,” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littiraire du moyen âge, Vol. XXII (1957) pp. 5-53; and Témoins nouveau de ‘la région de dissemblance’,” Bibliotèque de l’école des Chartes, Vol. CXVIII (1960) pp. 20-36.
Return 1The Douay-Rheims translates “paries” as “wall,” but St. Thomas distinguishes between “paries” and “murus.” The former is a temporary partition—I have translated it as “barrier”—whereas the latter is permanent and used often in reference to city walls.
Return 1St. Augustine’s De Gratia Christi et Peccato Originali, 2, 24–25 (P.L. 44, Col 398-400); also Contra Adamantum Manich. Discip. 17, (P.L. 42, Col 157-62). In St. Thomas’ view of salvation-history the Old Law had an embryonic relationship to the New: “As the effect is in its cause, or the perfect is in its less perfect beginnings-just as the whole tree is contained in the seed-so is the New Law contained in the Old Law.” S.T. I-II, 107, 3. This is a corollary of the general pattern of God’s salvific revelation to man, it is gradual in order for man to better assimilate. it (ibid., 99, 6). Thus the New Covenant fulfills the Old by realizing its deepest potentialities (ibid., 107, 2); they both have the same goal while they differ as less perfect and more perfect in their methods of attaining that goal (ibid., 107, 1). This is why Aquinas characterized the Old Law as one of Fear and the New as one of Love. For a genuine supernatural love could only be offered to God by God himself become man and communicating his love, the Holy Spirit, to other men (S.T. II-II, 24, 2c; III, 8, 6c). Hence Christ is the head of all mankind (ibid., III, 8, 3) and those who observed God’s commands out of supernatural love in the Old Testament really belonged to the New, while those in the New Covenant who still practice virtue out of fear of punishment are acting as though they were under the Old Law (ibid., I-II, 107, 1 ad 2). For a comparison of the Old and New Covenants in an eschatological perspective, cf. ibid., 103, 3.
Return 1The ceremonial precepts, in Aquinas’ view, served two purposes. One was to provide Israel with a suitable religious cult of Yahweh, the other was to symbolize the mystery of Christ. Thomas (in S.T. I-II, 102, 2) refers to St. Jerome’s comment on Old Testament prophecy to show how this symbolic character must be present in the actual rites themselves and not fanciful speculations arbitrarily tacked on to them later. Jerome’s observation was: “During the course of the Old Testament period the prophets promised much about the coming of Christ and the salvation of the Gentiles; yet they did this precisely by not neglecting the age in which they lived. As though they would not instruct the assembled people about the matters then confronting them, but would rather seem to wildly speculate about uncertain and future happenings.” (Comm. super Osee, 1, P.L. 25, 824). In the remaining articles of question 102 St. Thomas applies the principles discussed here, and in note 56 above, with too much attention to minor details—closer to Latin patristic methods than those of modem scholars. Nevertheless, the latter base their theories on principles similar to those St. Thomas adopted, cf. C. Charlier, The Christian Approach to the Bible, (Maryland: Newman, 1959) pp. 15984,255-73.
Return 1The text is somewhat ambiguous here: inter Judaeos et Gentiles: quia isti volebant legem servare, illi vero minime...” According to literal usage, “isti” and “illi” would make the passage read: “between the Jews and Gentiles, the latter wanting to observe the law and the former least (wanting it).” If Thomas was asserting that the Gentiles were eager to observe the law, then either the Jews were not at all eager to observe it themselves or they were not eager to let the Gentiles do so. Old Testament history, however, offers so few instances of these phenomena—not to mention St. Paul’s struggles with the judaizing Christians in the New—that I have taken “isti” to refer to the Jews and “illi” to the Gentiles.
Return 1The Douay-Rheims, closer to the meaning of the Greek, translates the “decretis” of the Vulgate as “in the decrees,” referring to the Old Testament. St. Thomas saw it instead as an ablative of means, “by the decrees,” referring to the commands of the New Law abrogating the Old. The following text from Leviticus is used to designate the three divinely originating laws operative in human history and society, cf. S.T. I-II, 91; 93; 98; 106. The temporal adjectives of the scriptural text have the following correlatives:
oldest — natural law
old — Old Law, especially ceremonial precepts
new — New Law of the Gospel.
The basic principles of the natural law were changed by neither the Old nor the New Laws (ibid., I-II, 94, 5). Since the moral precepts, e.g., the ten commandments, are closely related to the natural law they too are still in force (ibid., 100, 1). The New Law of the Gospel is primarily a spiritual law, existing by the grace of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the faithful; the written expression of this law is only a secondary characteristic (ibid., 106, 1-2).
Return 1The Gloss is the Lombard’s Collectanea, P.L. 192, Col 184. St. Thomas took his interpretation of “decretis” as an ablative of means from this source.
Return 1Cf. Augustine’s commentary on Ps 124, n. 10 (P.L. 37, Col 1655--56). In discussing the peace which results from true Christian love, St. Thomas is careful to point out that it consists in a harmony of wills in matters pertaining to salvation, and not necessarily in a harmony of intellectual opinions, cf. S.T. II-II, 29, 1; 3 ad 2; 37, 1; 38, 1. St. Augustine’s sharp difference of opinion with St. Jerome indicates that he understood the distinction clearly, cf. St. Augustine’s Letters (translated by W. Parsons, S.N.D., F.C., 1951) Vol. 1, pp. 93 ff., 172 ff., 390 ff. A short history of the dispute is given in The Letters of St. Jerome (translated by C. Mierow, A.C.W. 1963) Vol. 1, pp. 13-16; and one of Jerome’s sharper responses is in The Satirical Letters of St. Jerome (translated by P. Carroll, Chicago: Gateway, 1956), pp. 123-26.
Return 1I have translated “collegium fidelium” as “the community of the faithful”: although the collegiality of the faithful certainly carries different connotations than the community of the faithful. Throughout these paragraphs community translates collegium. The political community and the domestic community are two distinct domains in human intersubjective experience. Each has its own type of authority, cf. In Libros Politicorum Aristotelis Expositio (Turin: Marietti, 1951) p. 27, n. 90; and each requires its own specialization of the virtue of prudence, cf. S.T. II-II, 50, 2 ad 3.
Return 1In both the Piana-Cai and the Parma editions this is given as a direct quotation. It seems to come from The City of God, XIV, 28 (P.L. 41, 436). But there it reads: “Two cities have been formed by two loves: the earthly by the love of self, even to the contempt of God; the heavenly by the love of God, even to the contempt of self.” (translated by M. Dodds, New York: Modern Library, 1950), p. 477. It is most likely that St. Thomas picked up his “Jerusalem-Babylon” designations from a sentence in Peter Lombard’s commentary on this same verse in Ephesians (P.L. 192, Col 186): “Two loves have made the whole world into two cities, the love of God has formed Jerusalem, and earthly love Babylon.”
Return 1The Parma edition notes that a quotation from Proverbs 31:21 has been inserted at this point: “For all her domestics are clothed with double garments.” The Piana-Cai includes it in the text without comment. If St. Thomas actually mentioned the quote in his lecture it may have been within a context which pointed out how love of Cod to contempt of self paradoxically leads to the highest realization of self; the city of God’s love takes good care of its domestics. This is the analysis St. Bernard made of the growth in man’s love for God. He begins by loving God for man’s sake and, in the fourth and highest stage, ends by loving himself for God’s sake, cf. Saint Bernard on the Love of God, a translation of De Diligendo Deo (P.L. 182, 973 ff.), by T. Connolly, S.J. (Maryland: Newman, 1951) pp. 43-46. Man discovers his true identity in God, cf. Gilson, op. cit., pp. 128 ff. and notes 102 and 151 below.
Return 1Primary and secondary should be understood here in the light of primary and secondary causality. The secondary causes are totally dependent on God, the primary and universal cause, Cf. S.T. I, 19, 6; 21, 4; 65, 3; 105, 6. But this in no way dispenses from the necessity and real causal influence of the secondary causes, ibid., 22, 3; 103, 6; 116, 2. St. Thomas hints, in this way, at the intimate relationship between Christ and the scriptures.
Return 1Aquinas interprets Mt 16:18 as primarily referring to Peter’s confession of Christ’s divinity: “‘Upon this rock,’ namely, your confession, ‘I will build my Church.’” (S.T. II-II, 174, 6c). And this is the meaning he gives the text here. For the New Testament affirmation of the Petrine teaching office he more realistically turns to Lk 22:32, “But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not; and thou, being once converted, confirm thy brethren.” (ibid., II-II, 1, 10c). Yet St. Thomas was aware of other possibilities, cf. his Commentary on St. Matthew’s Gospel, Ch. 16, Lect. 2.
Return 1In contemporary terms, these four stages would be: laying the foundation, erecting the supporting superstructure, filling in the rest of the building’s shell, and finally doing the interior.
Return 1Allegorical and moral meanings are two of the spiritual senses of Scripture. Here is an instance in which St. Thomas uses allegory, not simply of Old Testament events signifying those of the New, but in the broader meaning of mysteries pertaining to faith, cf. de Lubac, Exégèse meédiévale, 1-1, pp. 489 ff.
Return 1Men are only the instruments of God both in their own sanctification, and—as with the ecclesiastical ministers or prelates—in the sanctification of other men. Sanctity is not man-made independently of God.
Return 1St. Thomas sees the “in quo” of the Vulgate as referring to the Holy Temple, while the Douay-Rheims, and most modern translators, view it in reference to our Lord, translating it “in whom” instead of “in which.”
Return 1