by John Calvin
BooksForTheAges
AGES Software • Albany, OR USA Version 1.0 © 1998
COMMENTARIES
ON THE
BOOK OF THE PROPHET JEREMIAH
BY JOHN CALVIN.
TRANSLATED FROM THE LATIN, AND EDITED
BY THE REV. JOHN OWEN,
VICAR OF THRUSSINGTON, LEICESTERSHIRE.
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE.
THE COMMENTARIES ON JEREMIAH, like those on THE MINOR PROPHETS, were delivered as LECTURES IN THE THEOLOGICAL SCHOOL AT GENEVA, taken down by some of the Pupils, and afterwards read to CALVIN, and corrected. We find in them the production of the same vigorous and expansive mind: The Divine Oracles are faithfully explained, the meaning is clearly stated, and such brief deductions are made as the subjects legitimately warrant. Though the Lectures were extemporaneously delivered, there is yet so much order preserved, and such brevity, clearness, and suitableness of diction are found in them, that in these respects they nearly equal the most finished compositions of CALVIN as proof that he possessed a mind of no common order.
THE MINISTRY OF JEREMIAH extended over a large space of time from the thirteenth year of JOSIAH’S reign till after the final overthrow of the nation; but for how long after that period, it is not known. fA1 Between the thirteenth year of Josiah and the destruction of the city and Temple, there were about forty years. This was a remarkable period, and JEREMIAH nearly alone labored among the people. Their sins had been for the most part the same for a long time — for nearly two centuries, as it appears from the testimonies of his predecessors, AMOS, HOSEA, ISAIAH, JOEL, MICAH, NAHUM, and ZEPHANIAH; for these seven had in this order preceded him. ZEPHANIAH AND HABAKKUK were probably for a time his contemporaries, the first at the commencement, and the other near the end of his ministry. The contumacy with which JEREMIAH often charged the Jews was here evident, as they continued in their evil courses after so many urgent remonstrances by the former Prophets.
What an example of blindness and of the power of superstition does the history of the Jews at this period exhibit! No past nor present calamities, and no threatenings of still greater calamities, and no promises of Divine favor and of temporal blessings, were sufficient to keep them from idolatrous and immoral practices — and such practices, too, as were plainly and explicitly condemned by that very Law which they professed to receive! Such inconsistency might have been deemed impossible, had it not been exemplified in the Jews: but it is an inconsistency which is still exhibited in the conduct of many calling themselves Christians.
As to THE STYLE OF JEREMIAH, the opinion of the accurate and elegant Lowth is as follows:
“JEREMIAH, though not wanting either in elegance or sublimity, is yet in both inferior to ISAIAH. Jerome seems to charge him with some measure of rusticity as to his expressions; but of this, I truly confess, I have found no traces. In thoughts, indeed, he is somewhat less elevated, being for the most part more loose and diffuse in his sentences, as one more conversant with the more tender feelings, being especially capable of expressing sorrow and sympathy. This, indeed, appears mainly in THE LAMENTATIONS, where these feelings alone predominate; but it is also often found in his Prophecies, and particularly in the first part of his Book, which is chiefly poetical. The middle part is nearly all historical; and the last, consisting of six chapters, is altogether poetical, and contains several oracles plainly expressed, in which the Prophet nearly approaches the sublimity of ISAIAH. But of the whole Book of JEREMIAH, hardly the half do I consider to be poetical.” — Proel, 21.
Venema mainly agrees with Lowth: he blames Jerome for ascribing rusticity of diction to our Prophet, and says that he was no good judge (peritus Judex) of such matters. Speaking of JEREMIAH’S style, he says, “His diction is not so lofty and sublime as that of ISAIAH, though in the six last chapters, 46-51., it seems to me to be nearly equal to it, being no less pure, expressive, and copious, besprinkled also with tropes and metaphors as with lights, and fitted to move the feelings and to stimulate the heart to repentance, for which it was designed. The LAMENTATIONS alone are sufficient to defend JEREMIAH against the charge of ignorance and rusticity; for antiquity, as Sanctums rightly observes, has nothing more grave, more harmonious, more expressive.” Com. ad Jer., p. 8.
“He is admirably pathetic,” says Scott; “his descriptions of approaching judgments are peculiarly vivid; and his eloquence is very vigorous and impressive, when inveighing against the shameless audacity of the people in rebellion against God.”
Of JEREMIAH as a Prophet, Henry mentions these particulars: 1. That he was made a Prophet when young;-2. That he continued long a Prophet;-3.
That he was a reproving Prophet;-4. That he was a weeping Prophet; — and, 5. That he was a suffering Prophet, having been persecuted by his own nation more than any other.
There are several references in the New Testament to JEREMIAH and to his writings. See Matthew 2:17, 18; Matthew 16:14; Hebrews 8:8-13; Hebrews 10:15-17. “These last references,
“observes Scott, “are peculiarly important; for in one of them God himself is mentioned as speaking the words referred to; and in the other it is said, ‘Whereof the Holy Ghost is a witness to us.’ This is decisive, as to the judgment of the inspired Apostles, respecting the Book on which we now enter, and is peculiarly suited to put us on our guard against those professed friends of the Scriptures, who speak of these books as venerable, authentic, or genuine remains of antiquity, of great value and high authority, but hesitate to vindicate them as divinely inspired.” Pref. to Jer.
Nothing is with any certainty known as having been written by JEREMIAH, except this Book and the Lamentations. Ascribed to him has been a funeral song on the death of Josiah, (2 Chronicles 35:25) which, Josephus says, was extant in his day. It has been also said by some that he wrote the 137th Psalm (Psalm 137), and in connection with EZEKIEL, the 46th Psalm (Psalm 46). His Letter to the captives in Babylon in the Apocrypha, appended to the book of Barite, is no doubt spurious: its style is very different from that of JEREMIAH.
It is universally admitted that the CHAPTERS in this Book are not in their right order. How this has happened, none have been able to conjecture; but the fact is evident. According to Blayney, whose account seems correct, the twelve first chapters contain prophecies delivered in the reign of JOSIAH. Those in the thirteenth, and in the following chapters to the twentieth inclusively, were delivered in the reign of JEHOIAKIM. Now begins the disorder; the twenty — first contains what was spoken in the time of ZEDEKIAH, the last king: and afterwards we have what was delivered in a former reign. The kings of Judah, during JEREMIAH’S ministry, were these: JOSIAH; SHALLUM or JEHOAHAZ, his second son; JEHOIAKIM, his eldest son; JECONIAH, the son of JEHOIAKIM; and ZEDEKIAH, the youngest son of JOSIAH. Blayney thinks that no prophecies were delivered in the reigns of SHALLUM and of JECONIAH. Then his classification may be stated as follows:-During the reign of
Josiah, were delivered, chapters 1-12, inclusively.
Shallum, none.
Jehoiakim, chapters 13-20, inclusively, 22, 23, 25, 26, 35, 36, 45, 46, 47, 48, and 49 to verse 33 inclusively.
Jeconiah, none.
Zedekiah, chapters 21, 24, 27 -34, 37-39, 49: from verse 34 to the end, 1, and 51.
The 40-44, inclusively, were written after the destruction of Jerusalem and the captivity of the people; and the 52, the last, during the same time, or as it is commonly supposed, by EZRA; it is an epitome of the progressive and final overthrow of the kingdom.
There were several circumstances worthy of notice, with regard to THE JEWS, during the ministry of JEREMIAH:
1. The means which God employed to lead them to repentance, and to a reformation of their conduct, both as to religion and morals: he gave them a pious and a reforming king in JOSIAH; the Book of the Law was providentially discovered and widely made known; a reformation was carried on according to its requirements, while idolatrous practices were in a great measure put an end to; the people had also before their eyes the awful judgment of God on their brethren, THE ISRAELITES, in banishing them from their country; and the powerful preaching of JEREMIAH sounded in their ears.
2. The manifest evidences of God’s displeasure: their good king, JOSIAH, was suddenly taken from them, no doubt as a judgment for their ingratitude; his successor, SUALLUM, was, after three months’ reign, taken prisoner by the Egyptians, and the country was put under tribute; the country was visited with grievous famine, as recorded in chap. 14.; and JEREMIAH, by GOD’S command, denounced on them the punishment of an entire extinction as a nation.
3. The extremely corrupted state of the people: they were both most idolatrous and most immoral, unfaithful to God and to man in a degree hardly credible. During JOSIAH’S reign they pretended to cast away their gross superstitions, but after his death they returned to them, as it were, with increased avidity; and with these superstitions was combined the prostration of every moral principle, and of every natural feeling. Superstition ever destroys morality, and enfeebles all the social and natural sympathies of men. What a picture of the effects of superstition is given by JEREMIAH in chapter 9!
4. Notwithstanding this extremely degenerated state of things, THE JEWS harbored the conviction that their ruin, as denounced by JEREMIAH, was impossible. While practically denying GOD, they yet rested their confidence on his promises respecting the perpetuity of DAVID’S kingdom, and on their outward privileges; taking as unconditional what was conditional, and regarding the mere possession of divine institutions as a sufficient security. And in this vain confidence they were encouraged and confirmed by false Prophets and corrupt Priests, in opposition to GOD’S messages by his Prophet JEREMIAH, and to the plain declarations of that Law, the authority of which they still ostensibly acknowledged!
These things have been recorded for our instruction.
Some of JEREMIAH’S Prophecies were fulfilled in the days of many of those who heard them; such as those which refer to the Captivity of the people, and to the destruction of the neighboring nations by the king of Babylon. Other prophecies extend farther, to times more remote, to the destruction of Babylon, to the restoration of the Jews after the term of seventy years, and to the destinies of various nations. There are also Prophecies respecting THE MESSIAH, as The Lord Our Righteousness, The Evangelical Covenant, The Call of the Gentiles, and final Restoration of The Jews. So that there are in this Book some Prophecies which were soon fulfilled, others at a more distant time, and some which are still to be fulfilled. Who but GOD, the Sole and the Supreme Ruler of the world, and the regulator and disposer of all events, could have announced such Prophecies? All those which refer to the past have been fulfilled, fully and completely; and with no less certainty shall all such as refer to what is future be in due time fulfilled. Nothing can intercept the exercise of Divine Faithfulness; nothing can obstruct the working of INFINITE POWER.
Facsimile copies of the old Latin, French, and English title — pages follow this Preface, with a reprint of the Dedication by CLEMENT COTTON to the COUNTESS OF BEDFORD, prefixed to his English Translation of 1620.
J. O. THRUSSINGTON, September 1850.
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE
VOLUME THIRD
The derangement as to the order of the chapters first occurs in this Volume. It is commonly thought that chapters 21, 24, and 27, were delivered in the time of Zedekiah; while chapters 20, 22, 23, 25, and 26, contain Prophecies delivered in the previous reign of Jehoiakim. The early Versions and the Targum retain the same order with the Hebrew, only there are derangements of another kind both in the Septuagint and the Arabic, which commence at verse 14 of chapter 25, and continue to the end of chapter 51: It hence appears that the disorder had taken place early, before the Versions were made.
There are a few particulars to which the Editor wishes to draw the attention of Literary Readers, some of which have been already noticed in the Notes appended to previous Volumes, though not perhaps so fully specified as to attract attention; and there is one subject which belongs especially to this Volume.
The first thing is in reference to a Hebrew idiom; and that with regard to the pronoun relative rça, who, which, whom. There is a peculiarity as to the use of this which has been overlooked, as far as the writer knows, by Grammarians. It precedes in Hebrew, as in other languages, the verb by which it is governed; but when it is not governed in a transitive sense, a personal pronoun follows the verb with a preposition prefixed to it, as, for instance, in Jeremiah 1:2,
“To whom the word of the Lord came;”
which is literally, “Whom the word of the Lord came to him.” “To him” and “whom” are the same. It is an idiom, and the same exists in Welsh, which in many of its peculiarities corresponds exactly with the Hebrew. This passage, and others of a similar kind, are literally the same in that language, “Yr hwn y daeth gair yr Arglwydd atto;” and the last word, “atto,” the preposition being prefixed to the pronoun, and made, as it were, one word, corresponds exactly with the Hebrew.
We have, in Jeremiah 7:10, these words —
“Which (God’s house) is called by my Name,” literally, “which my Name is called on it;”
which means, “on which my Name is called.” The following are similar examples: —
“Unto whom they offer incense” literally, “whom they offer incense to them,” (Jeremiah 11:12;)
“Against whom I have pronounced;” literally, “whom I have pronounced against them,” (Jeremiah 18:8;)
“Upon whose roofs they have burned incense;” literally, “which they have burned incense on their roofs,” (Jeremiah 19:13.)
In all these instances the Welsh is literally the Hebrew. The last example is rather remarkable, but the Welsh is exactly the same, “y rhai yr arogldarthasant ar eu pennau.” The verb, also, is similar, derived from the noun which means incense, “they have incensed;” but the verb in English is not so used. There is hardly a noun or a verb in Hebrew which the Welsh cannot literally express — a peculiarity which neither Latin nor Greek possesses, and perhaps no modern language. See also Genesis 44:5, 10, 16; 48:15; Deuteronomy 11:24; Deuteronomy 12:2; Isaiah 31:4; Jeremiah 14:15; Jeremiah 17:19; Amos 9:12; Jonah 4:10, 11. fE1A
But it must be especially observed, as the point will be hereafter referred to, that when the relative pronoun is governed by the verb in a transitive sense, without a preposition, there is then no personal pronoun added after the verb, either affixed to it or separately. This seems to be an invariable rule, —
“The land that I have given for an inheritance; ytljnh rça” (Jeremiah 3:18.)
“In the land that I gave; yttn rça” (Jeremiah 7:7.)
“My law which I set before them; µhynpl yttn rça” (Jeremiah 9:13.)
See also Psalm 78:69; 86: 9; 105:5; Jeremiah 7:23; 9:16; 11:10; 13:4; 15:4; 16:13; Ezekiel 18:27; Daniel 9:10.
The Second point is connected with the style of the hebrew prophets.
The order in which they arrange their ideas. — They frequently mention, first, the effect, then the cause — first, the last act, then the previous act or acts — first, the deed or action, then the motive or what led to the deed — first, the later event, then the former — first, what is most evident and visible, then what is less ostensible and hidden. In all these instances, the order is the reverse of what is commonly found in other writers.
“My people is foolish,” the effect; “they have not known me,” the cause. (Jeremiah 4:22.) “Before me continually is grief,” the effect; “and wounds,” the cause. (Jeremiah 6:7.) “I sent them not,” the last act; “neither have I commanded them,” the preceding; “neither spake to them,” the first. (Jeremiah 14:14.) “With an outstretched hand and a strong arm,” the deed or action; “even in anger and in fury, and in great wrath,” what led to the deed. (Jeremiah 21:5.) “The truth to Jacob,” the later event; “and the mercy to Abraham,” the former event. (Micah 7:20.) “Hast thou utterly rejected Judah?” the visible act; “hath thy soul loathed Zion?” the hidden reason. (Jeremiah 14:19.)
Similar instances are found in the New Testament. What is palpable and evident is stated first, then what leads to it, or the source from which it comes; as when St. Paul mentions “rioting” first, and then “drunkenness,” which leads to it; and “strife” first, and then “envying,” from which it proceeds. (Romans 13:13.) In a like manner he puts “joy,” the higher and the most manifest feeling, before “peace,” which is the source of it. (Romans 15:13) In Ephesians 6:23, the Apostle mentions “peace, love, and faith;” the right order is reversed — the most evident thing is first referred to. There are many passages which can be satisfactorily explained on no other principle.
2. The order in which subjects are often treated. — When two things are referred to, the last mentioned is first spoken of, and then the first. This is what is very commonly done. Pollution and going after Baalim are laid to the charge of Israel in Jeremiah 2:23. To prove the last it is added,
“See thy way in the valley;”
and to bring connection as to the first, God says,
“Know what thou hast done.”
In Jeremiah 4:28, we have these words,
“I have spoken it, I have purposed it.”
The next sentence applies to the last,
“and I will not repent,”
and the following to what he had spoken,
“Neither will I turn back from it.”
Neighbor and brother are mentioned in Jeremiah 9:4; the order is reversed in the latter clause of the verse. Pashur and the people of Judah are addressed in Jeremiah 20:4; the doom of Judah is described in the following verse, and in the sixth the doom of Pashur. God speaks of
“The way of life and of the way of death,”
in Jeremiah 21:8; in the next verse, such as would meet with death are first referred to, and then those to whom life would be granted. In Deuteronomy 27:11-26, and Deuteronomy 28:1-6,
“blessing” and “curse” are mentioned, and then the “curse” is first described, and afterwards the “blessing.” This mode of treating subjects is indeed so common that it would be useless to multiply examples; and there are not a few instances of the same kind in the New Testament. fE2B
The Third subject is the construction of a passage in this Volume, in connection with another, which will be included in the next.
— The two passages are Jeremiah 23:6, and 33:16. The doctrine involved is important; but our business is to ascertain the real meaning according to the current diction of the language. These passages are not rendered alike in our Version, nor in the same sense; and yet it is evident from the context that the meaning of both passages must be the same, though the words are in some measure different. However we may differ from Blayney, he yet seems to have been at least so far right, as he renders them both in the same sense. His versions are the following: —
“And this is the Name by which Jehovah shall call him, Our Righteousness.” (Jeremiah 23:6.)
“And this is he whom Jehovah shall call, Our Righteousness.” (Jeremiah 23:16.)
In a Note on the last verse, it is said, “This is the strict grammatical translation of the words of the text.” There is no doubt but that it may be so rendered; and here is an instance of what has been already observed as to the relative rça. It has often after the verb a personal pronoun with a preposition prefixed: and as the verb arq, whenever it means to name, has the preposition l after it, so it has here. The relative and the pronoun in this case always refer to the same thing or person. Since this is the idiom of the language, it becomes evident that hl in this verse, is a masculine according to Chaldee dialect, as Blayney regards it, or a misprint for wl according to three MSS.; for rça, with which it is connected, has, hz, “this” for its antecedent; and “this” is clearly the “king” mentioned in the previous verse.
The matter then is so far clear as to construction of this part of the verse; but whether “Jehovah” is the nominative to the verb is another question; and this we shall presently consider.
The words in the other passage, Jeremiah 23:6, are somewhat different. The word “Name” is in it; but it has no personal pronoun with a l prefixed, which is ever the case when arq means to name, and when the word “name” is omitted. See Genesis 21:31; Genesis 35:18; 1 Samuel 23:28; 1 Chronicles 11:7; Jeremiah 30:17.
But when “name” is connected with the verb in this sense, the preposition l is not found. See Genesis 11:9; 29:35; 1 Chronicles 4:9. This accounts for the absence of the pronoun with a l prefixed coming after the verb in this passage, which is found in the other in which the word “name” is omitted. The rça then here refers to the “name,” and stands as it were in its place; and the literal rendering, if we adopt Blayney’s arrangement of the words, would be as follows, —
And this is His Name, which Jehovah shall call it, Our Righteousness.
Now there is a grammatical objection to this rendering; for rça, as before mentioned, when governed by a verb in the objective case, is never followed by a personal pronoun after the verb, either postfixed or separately. But here the w in warqy is made a pronoun, wholly contrary to the usage of the language in such a case as the present. The other passage may admit of Blayney’s construction; but his version here is, as I conceive, inadmissible, being ungrammatical; the verb is in the plural number and not in the singular, with an affixed pronoun, therefore Jehovah cannot be its nominative case.
It may then be asked, how is the passage to be translated? Let the reader bear in mind, that when the word “Name — µç,” is connected with arq, there is no preposition used; and as rça here has “Name” as its antecedent, it is not necessary to have a pronoun with a prefixed l after the verb; but this is necessary in the other passage, for the word “name” is not given. Here we see a perfect consistency in the two passages, though differently worded. Then the true version of this passage I conceive to be the following, —
“And this is His Name, which they shall call, Jehovah our Righteousness.”
But in our language it might be rendered, “by which they shall call him” The pronoun “they” refers to Judah and Israel, at the beginning of the verse. As then “Jehovah” cannot be here the nominative case to “call,” there is no grammatical necessity to make it so in the other passage, though there is nothing contrary to the usage of the language in such a construction. The other passage may be rendered literally thus, —
“And this is He, whom it shall be called on Him, Jehovah our Righteousness.”
The words in the idiom of our language may be thus correctly expressed, “who shall be called.” But however awkward and even unintelligible the literal rendering may be in English, yet it is in Welsh both expressive and elegant. The phrase is word for word the same, and thoroughly idiomatic, —
“Ac eve yw’r hwn y gelwir arno, Jehova ein cyviawnder.” fE3A
We shall now refer to the early versions and the Targum.
In the Septuagint, the passage in Jeremiah 23:6, is rendered substantially according to what is done by Blayney; he indeed defends himself by appealing to that version. As to the passage in Jeremiah 33:16, it is wanting in the Septuagint; as supplied in the Complutensian
Edition, it is evidently a version of the Vulgate, as is the case in other instances; and as given by Theodoret, it is as follows, —
“This is He who shall be called (ὁ κληθήσεται) The Lord our Righteousness.”
The Vulgate version is the same in both places, —
“And this is the Name which they shall call him, Our righteous Lord.”
The Syriac version is the same in both places, —
“And this is the Name by which they shall call Him, The Lord our Righteousness.”
The Arabic version is the same with the preceding, only “righteousness” is not translated; it is “The Lord Josedek.” It is wanting like the Septuagint as to the second passage.
The paraphrase of the Targum is substantially the same as to both places, —
“And this is the Name by which they shall call Him, Done shall be righteousness for us from the presence of the Lord in his days.”
It appears then from all the Early Versions, except the Septuagint as to the first passage, and from the Targum, that “Jehovah” is not connected with the verb to call, but with “righteousness;” and this, as we have seen, comports with what the usage of the language requires. There can therefore be no reasonable doubt as to the real meaning of these two passages.
As to the peculiar idioms of the Hebrew language, the Septuagint version of Jeremiah and of the minor prophets, is by no means so satisfactory as the Vulgate and the Syriac versions. This is what the Editor can testify after a minute examination.
J.O. Thrussington, September, 1852
IOANNIS
CALV INI
PRAELECTIONES
IN
LIBRVM PROPHETIARVM
JEREMIAE ET LAMENTATIONES,
¶Joannis Budaei & Caroli Jonuillaei labore et industria excerptae.
Cum duobus indicibus, priore quidera rerum ac sententiarum maxime insignem: pofteriore vero locorum qui ex vetere & nouo Testamento citantur & explicantur.
GENEVAE,
APUD HAERED. EVSTATH. VIIGNON.
M.D. LXXXIX.
LECONS
OV
COMMENTAIRES ET EXPOSITIONS
DE
IEAN CALVIN
SUR
LES REUELATIONS QUE SUR LES LAMENTATIONS DU
PROPHETE JEREMIE.
Le tout fidellement recueilli, premierement en Latin par Iean Bude, & Charles de Ionuillier: & depuis translate nouuellement en François.
Auec deux Tables bien vtiles, la premiere des choses les plus notables contenues en ce liure: l’autre des passages alleguez & expofez, tant du vieil que du nouueau Testament.
A LYON.
PAR CLAUDE SENNETON.
M.D. LXV.
TWO AND
TVVENTY LECTVRES
VPON THE FIVE FIRST CHAPTERS OF IEREMIAH.
WITH PRAYERS ANNEXED, AT THE END OF EUERY LECTURE:
BY MASTER IOHN CALVIN.
WHICH BEING FAITHFVLLY collected from him as hee vttered them in Latine, in the Schooles of Geneua, were afterwards translated into French:
And now newly turned out of French, into English, with a Table at the end, containing the summe and scope of euery Lecture.
MATTHEW 24:15.
Let him that readeth, consider it.
AT LONDON, Imprinted by Felix Kingston, for Nathanael Newbery, and are to be sold at the signe of the Star, vnder Saint Peters Church in Cornhill, and in Popes head Alley. 1620.
TO THE NOBLE
AND VERTVOVS LADY,
THE LADY LVCIE, COVNTESSE
OF BEDFORD:AND TO THE RIGHT HONORABLE AND HIGHLY HONORED LADY, THE LADY ANNE HARRINGTON, BARRONES:MERCY
AND PEACE BE MULTIPLIED.
Right Honorable: The holy Prophet Jeremiah (according to the diuers subjects he had to work upon in his ministerial function) is forced sometimes, with Isaiah his forerunner, to lift up his voice like unto a Sonne of Thunder; (Isaiah 58:1) and eftsoones, with the same Prophet againe, to altar and change the same into the still and soft voice of a Sonne of Consolation: (1 Kings 19:20) wherein, as God’s faithful messenger, hee carries himself faithfully: For as a Sonne of Thunder, he sharply inueyes against the sinnes and sinners of his time, boldly denouncing God’s judgements against them; and as a Sonne of Consolation, (for their sakes whom the Lord had appointed to bee heires of sahation,) hee sweetly preacheth Christ, mixing often with the terrible threats of the Law the sauing promises of the Gospel; that if any came, by the ministry of the one, to be pricked in conscience and humbled, (Acts 2:37) he readily, like the good Samaritan, powreth in the mollifying and healing oyle of the other to cure and reuiue them. And thus, as a wise disposer and dispenser of the manifold secrets of God, (<19A101>Psalm 101:1) his song (in a manner) throughout his Prophesy (like Aaron’s Bels — Exodus 28:33) soundeth forth judgement and mercy; preaching judgement to such as were and would be sinners in Sion, (Isaiah 33:14) and mercy to such as he saw to be mourners in Sion. (Isaiah 61:3). In which respects he may serue as a liuely patterne for all Preachers to follow in their ordinary course of preaching. These Sermons of his (many of them) doe notably sute to our times; and therefore ought to be read, and read againe, of all estates high and low.
But for as much as in reading the Prophets sundry difficulties are met withall, which euery one hath not the skill of himself to dissolue, it would (as I think) be very beneficial for such if they had an holy helper, such an one as this, ready at hand: An interpreter; One (indeed) of a thousand, (Job 33:23) that might help to dissolve their doubts, and unloose their hard knots for them; that so understanding what they read, they might (by the blessing of God) with the more ease come to profit by their reading. This hath our Philip (Acts 8:34-35) faithfully performed (according to that light of understanding wherewith the Lord had extraordinarily endowed him) throughout the Prophets; and pity it is that so great light should after a sort he buried in darkness from many well minded Christians, onely because they are not (as they might be) turned into our owne natiue language.
Not many yeeres since, a Lampe (if I may so speake) began to be kindled, for giuing them some insight into the harder passages of the Prophets, by translating this Author’s Commentaries vpon the Prophecie of Isaiah into English; but much more cleere would the light haue now shined if thereunto had been added the translation of all his Lectures vpon the Prophesie of Ieremiah also. For mine owne part, seeing sufficiency of oyle hath failed me to furnish out this second Lampe vnto the end, I haue for the present proceeded onely through the flue first Chapters.
The which (Right Honorable) as a testimony of that seruice and duty I owe your Honors, I have presumed (as one ouertaken with Ahimaaz his hast, sorewhat abruptly, I confesse) to dedicate vnto you: And if in token of your favorable acceptance thereof you shall be pleased to suffer the same to passe vnder your Honorable names and patronage, many may be occasioned thereby to blesse God for you, and my selfe still to pray, that the blessing of him who was ready to perish may come vpon you.
Your Honor’s humbly at commandment,
CLEMENT COTTON.
TO THE
MOST ILLUSTRIOUS PRINCE,
D. FREDERICK,
LORD PALATINE OF THE RHINE, AND ELECTOR OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE, ETC.,
AND HIS MOST BENEVOLENT LORD,
JOHN CALVIN
WISHES ALL HAPPINESS.
As your heroic valor, Most Illustrious Prince, has been acknowledged by superior men and competent judges, and especially your singular piety, your labor to cherish and to promote true Religion, and uniform moderation through life; and also your great courtesy, such as can hardly be found in a private individual, and which I have not only known by report, but have also myself experienced, I have long wished by some public act to testify to posterity the high regard I entertain for you, being not satisfied with having it only in secret. This is well known to the noble — minded EDWARD, the COUNT or ESPACH, whom I have consulted on the subject.
But to discharge this duty at this time, not only an opportunity seems to be offered to me, but a certain necessity appears to constrain me; for, as you have reverently embraced the sound and orthodox doctrine concerning the Holy Supper of Christ, and have not hesitated freely and wisely to avow the same in your dominion, so turbulent and unreasonable men rage against you, as though you had upset all Germany! Hence they rush headlong to assail your Highness with violent clamors; and as they cannot prevail by authority and power, being full of presumption and insolence, they hesitate not to vomit forth their curses, of which men in their right mind would be ashamed; and not only so, but as it is not in their power to kill you, they fabricate shameful rumors respecting your death, as though a plot of flies were sufficient to darken the sun. And you, indeed, Most Illustrious Prince, according to the magnanimity of your mind, and in accordance with the high dignity in which God has placed you, do altogether disregard their mad conduct; but as they so busily labor to provoke you, and at the same time bring in my name to create an ill — will to you, I have thought it my duty, in refuting these calumnies, to set up as a shield against them the very name which they wish to make so odious; for certainly they are wholly unworthy that your Highness should raise your little finger against them, or utter the smallest word. Were I indeed disposed to expostulate with them on account of their madness in hating so much a man who has done something for the Church of God, and of whose labors they avail themselves with the unlearned, though they acknowledge it not, they would have no plea for their ingratitude. While, then, they endeavor, by bringing forward CALVINISM, to affix to your Highness some mark of infamy, they do nothing more than betray their own perversity, and also their folly and disgrace. But if they think that they gain something among those who are like themselves, my voice, on the other hand, in speaking of your just praises, will, I hope, be attended to by the godly, the well — informed, and men of calm minds and sound judgment.
Unprincipled men of this character do indeed pretend and loudly exclaim that they fight for God and their country; but whether it be so, it is easy for any one to judge: and I will not indeed discuss at large their delirious notions, as the greater part of them understand not what they vainly talk; I will only touch briefly on the main points in which we differ from their masters, for whom, nevertheless, I have a sincere regard.
That we really feed in the Holy Supper on the flesh and blood of Christ, no otherwise than as bread and wine are the aliments of our bodies, we freely confess. If a clearer explanation is asked, we say, that the substance of Christ’s flesh and blood is our spiritual life, and that it is communicated to us under the symbols of bread and wine; for Christ, in instituting the mystery of The Supper, promised nothing falsely, nor mocked us with a vain shew, but represented by external signs what he has really given us.
Now the question rests on the mode of communication; and hence the conflict arises, because we refuse to subscribe to their fancy respecting a local presence. We say, that though Christ is in heaven, yet through the hidden and incomprehensible power of his Spirit, this favor comes to us that His flesh becomes life to us, so that we become flesh of his flesh and bones of his bones. (Ephesians 5:30.) By them, on the contrary, it is maintained, that except Christ comes down on earth, there is no participation. That they may, however, get rid of the absurdity of a local presence, it has been found necessary to fabricate the strange notion of ubiquity; which, if we think it not possible to reconcile to the principles of faith, we must beg them at least to pardon our ignorance. Here we follow not our own understanding; but according to the knowledge given us from above, we cannot comprehend that it is at all agreeable to Scripture to say that the body of Christ is everywhere. Both Christ himself and His Apostles clearly shew that the immensity of God does not belong to the flesh; a personal union is what they teach; and no one, except .Eutyches, has hitherto taught, that the two natures became so blended, that when Christ became man, the attributes of Deity were communicated to his human nature. I am not indeed disposed to raise an odium against them by means of a man who has been condemned; they are yet to be reminded to think more attentively, and to consider how contention leads astray even good, learned, and acute men, when they are led away only by a desire to defend their own cause. Doubtless the best and the shortest way of confronting Nestorius at the Council of Ephesus would have been to say, that personal union communicates to two natures what is peculiar to each: to adduce this no one thought of doing on account of its absolute absurdity. I therefore greatly wonder that they who oppose us do not consider into what labyrinth they plunge themselves.
For if the infinity of God appertains to the flesh of Christ, because God was manifested in the flesh, with equal reason His Divinity may be said to have grieved and to have been thirsty, and to have been subject to death, and, in short, to have died; for they cannot escape, as it is a similar mode of reasoning. Christ, while yet a mortal, declared that He knew not when the day of judgment would be. Does He not in these words clearly and distinctly ascribe something to His human nature which could not justly be ascribed to His Divinity? What they bring forward as to the communication of properties, it is unreasonable, and what I may say without offending them, they mistake in a matter that is very simple and plain; for to ascribe what is peculiar to Deity to the Son of man, and again to attribute to Deity what belongs only to humanity, is very improper and rash. To prevent the ignorant from stumbling by blending together different things, and to take away from the dishonest any occasion for contending, orthodox writers have called this figure, “The communication of properties.” fA2
What they have said of certain expressions, has been with little thought applied to the subject. While Christ was on earth he said that the Son of man was in heaven. That no one, ill — informed, might think Christ’s body to be infinite, it has been deemed necessary to meet this case by a plain admonition, that on account of the unity of person what is suitable only to Divinity has been said of the Son of man. Paul says, as it is recorded by Luke, that God redeemed the Church by His own blood. (Acts 20:28.) Lest no one may hence conceive that God has blood, the same admonition ought to be sufficient to untie the knot; for as Christ was man and God, what is peculiar to His human nature is ascribed to His Divinity. As it was the Father’s design to employ this figure of speech for the purpose of teaching the simple and ignorant, it is absurd and even shameful to apply it for a different purpose, and to say that the communication of properties is the real blending of two natures.
But Christ, it is said, sits at the Father’s right hand, which is to be taken as meaning everywhere, confined within no limits. I indeed allow that God’s right hand is unlimited, and that wherever it is there is the kingdom of Christ; which is metaphorically represented in Scripture by the tern sitting: for whatever is declared of God is beyond controversy to be now ascribed to Christ; and therefore to sit, which means to govern the world, is what Christ has in common with the Father; and still more, as the Father by Him sustains the world, rules all things by His power, and especially manifests the presence of His grace in governing His Church, He may be said, strictly speaking, to reign in His own person. It hence follows, that he in a manner is everywhere; for He can be limited to no place who sustains and protects all parts of heaven and earth, and rules and regulates by His power all things above and below. When now I name Christ, I include the whole Person of the only — begotten Son, as manifested in the flesh. He, I say, God and man, is everywhere as to his authority and incomprehensible power, and infinite glory, according to what the faithful experience by evident effects, as they know and feel His presence. It is not then without reason that Paul declares, that He dwells in us. (Ephesians 3:17.) But to distort what is said of His infinite power, which is evident in His spiritual gifts, in the invisible aid which He affords, and in the whole of our salvation, and to apply it to His flesh, is by no means reasonable or consistent.
I wish that many of those who are with little reason angry with us, were at least to recall to mind that common and notable saying used in the Papal Schools, “Christ is whole everywhere, but not altogether.” fA3 They may repeat’ it as it is in the barbarous language of Peter Lombard, which is not pleasant to their tender and delicate ears. It is yet wisely expressed, from whomsoever it may have come, and I willingly adopt it. But I wonder whence is this daintiness! Seeing the Recantation of Berengarius delights Westphalus and those who are like him that Christ’s body is broken by the teeth and digested by the stomach — why is this sober distinction to be loathed, that Christ our Mediator is every — where entire, but not as to His flesh, which is confined within certain limits, while this power is infinite, and its operation felt on earth as well as in heaven?
There are two words commonly used, Union (unio) and Unity (unitas;) the first is applied to the two Natures, and the second to the Person alone. To assert the unity of the flesh and of Divinity, those would be ashamed to do, if I am not deceived, who yet inconsiderately adopt this absurdity; for, except the flesh differs and is distinct in its own peculiar properties from the Divine nature, they are by blending together become one. They, cavilling, facetiously ask, “In what region of the empyreal heaven does Christ sit?” let them indeed enjoy these fine speculations. I am taught by the Holy Spirit, that He is above all heavens, (Ephesians 4:10) according to the common mode of speaking in Scripture, I call whatever is beyond the world heaven. Hence it is enough for me, when Christ is to be sought, that our minds are to be raised above, that they may not remain on the earth and be entangled in gross superstitions.
This, then, is the sum and substance of the whole controversy, which the chief leaders of the adverse party too pertinaciously agitate, unless, indeed, we add another subject that the wicked, as they contend, partake of the flesh and blood of Christ no less than the true servants of God. And we indeed allow that they are equally offered to both; and that whatever may be the difference between men, yet God ever continues like himself the same; and that hence the difference in those who presumptuously thrust themselves does not arise from the nature of the sacrament. When, therefore, Christ gives his body to the unworthy, the difference proceeds from the manner in which it is received. But we deny that those are capable of receiving Christ whom the devil holds as his slaves, and in whom he has his habitation. We do not, however, reject the usual mode of speaking, that Christ is received by them sacramentally, provided absurd interpreters pervert not the words of Augustine, in which sacramental eating is said to be the reception of the substance without the grace; but this is a foolish remark, and unknown to Augustine. The reason they adduce, as it is weak, may easily be refuted. They say, that Christ came not only for salvation to the elect, but also for condemnation to the reprobate, because the Gospel being not received, but rejected, is the savor of death unto death to those who perish. But who has ever heard that the participation of Christ produces death? But if Christ be the occasion of condemnation to unbelievers because He is rejected by them, I see not how it can be that they procure for themselves condemnation by receiving his flesh. They answer and say, that they are, nevertheless, closed up so as not to admit His grace. But that they may gain credit to what they say, they must first prove their strange notion that those who are alienated from Christ eat His flesh, while it is to those without life destitute of its own virtue, and empty.
I have now faithfully and plainly explained why they who boast themselves to be the followers of Luther so hastily contend with us at this day. For the same reason they pour forth their execrations on Phillip Melancthon, now dead, a man who, for his incomparable knowledge in the highest branches of literature, his deep piety, and other endowments, deserves to be remembered by all ages, and whom they have hitherto regarded as their leader: and it is strange, that in order to obtain the favor of the public, they pretend to adopt that noble CONFESSION OF AUGSBURG, of which he was especially the author, and ought to be deemed its true interpreter. I regard them as turbulent and unprincipled men, who possess no common courtesy, and feel no shame.
But there are those who, in this respect, are different, and observe some moderation: and yet I have a just reason to complain, for some of them have acted so unfairly as to give my name in what they have published in German, and to withhold it in the Latin editions. Now this is to curse the deaf!
But, to omit other things, I revert again to their violent clamors, which are similar to the clamors of those frantic zealots, mentioned by Josephus, through whose excesses a cruel war was kindled, which involved Judea in entire ruin. (De Bell. Jude., lib. 14 et 15.) They can find nothing more atrocious by which they can irritate your Highness, Most Illustrious Prince, than the word CALVINISM. But whence this bitter hatred towards me it is not difficult to conjecture. For as they have thought the shortest way to victory to be by suppressing and concealing the real state of the case, and by dazzling the eyes of the simple, it is no wonder that they burn with rage when the clouds of ignorance in which they securely exulted were dissipated; and what especially drives them even to madness, is the fact, that they find that the whole subject is fully and really known by you, so that the doctrine, for which they triumphed while it was unknown, having obtained the patronage of high authority, and being supported by the pious and strong defense of a wise Prince, makes a freer progress.
It would indeed be superfluous to exhort you, who are of yourself sufficiently disposed, to persevere. That you may, however, disregard their impotency, and pursue the object so happily as well as judiciously undertaken, it seems not an useless attempt to confirm you in your course by leaving a pledge of the high regard I entertain for you. And I thought it no act of ingratitude for your incredible courtesy to dedicate to your renowned name my COMMENTARIES ON JEREMIAH. I indeed confess that it has not been elucidated with that care which so excellent a Book deserves; for as I delivered the Lectures from the pulpit, they were taken from my mouth; and I have indeed been before ashamed, that what might have been more accurately revised and polished by a longer meditation has come forth to light. I am also afraid lest the malevolent should accuse me of arrogance, for having obtruded on the public discourses extemporaneous and unwritten, and designed for a small auditory. It is easy to reply to the latter charge, for the first volume was sent to press against my will. That I may not, however, be without excuse, what I have to say is, that I have been led by the judgment of others. I hear of impartial and plain readers, who declare that they have received no small benefit from this kind of labor. And further, some think that a good end may be attained by making known my extempore mode of teaching, as its simplicity may cure many, who are too anxious of display, of that vice. Though learning and aptness to teach cannot satisfy all, I have yet carefully endeavored that Religion and Faith should not be found wanting by the impartial and well disposed. Nor do I, indeed, fear the charge of arrogance, when I fully avow, that I would have by no means suffered this Book to go forth to the public had I not thought that it would be useful and profitable to the Church of God.
But it may be that some rigid and severe critics will deem it a present unworthy of your Highness; but relying on your rare courtesy, Most Illustrious Prince, I hope it will be favorably accepted. And if JEREMIAH himself were now alive on earth, he would add, if I am not deceived, his recommendation; for he would acknowledge that his PROPHECIES have been explained by me not less honestly than reverently; and further, that they have been usefully accommodated to present circumstances. I feel not, however, over anxious to find an excuse, provided I know that I have done no wrong, except through an excessive desire to testify the veneration with which I regard your Highness.
But, to omit now what I have slightly mentioned at the beginning, I should condemn myself for ingratitude, were I not to consider myself under obligations to you for being so ready and disposed to receive The Christian Exiles who flee to you. It is the saying of a heathen woman, as mentioned by a poet-
*“* Being *acquainted with evil, I learn to aid the miserable.”* fA4
Let all who worship God and serve Christ be not ashamed, under similar circumstances, to be at least of the same mind. As my power of aiding is not equal to my wish, it becomes me at least to regard every kindness shewn to them as done to myself. Thirty years have passed away since my voluntary exile from FRANCE, because thence were exiled the truth of the Gospel, pure Religion, and the true Worship of God. I am now become so inured to my peregrination, that I feel no desire to return to my country. I am indeed here so far a stranger, (though once banished, I was yet so recalled, that I never feel ashamed,) that they deem me no more a foreigner than if I could name my ancestors as the citizens of this place. But the more kindly God has dealt with me, the greater concern ought I to feel for my brethren from FRANCE as well as from FLANDERS: and as they have been received with the same kindness by your Highness, this
stimulates and constrains me to avow my gratitude to one so much entitled to it.
Nor let it cause you any regret, Most Illustrious Prince, that you have been sometimes deceived in foreigners, and indeed in men of our language, but go on in your wonted course of benevolence. All know how basely you have been deceived by that most audacious and unprincipled man, at the same time vile, proud, and perfidious-in short, a monster, made up of a mass of filthy materials, even Francis Baldwin, and yet a skillful collector of the Civil Law. For having been in THE UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG, and having, under the pretext of the Gospel, been received under your patronage, and being made a Professor of the Civil Law through your liberality in THE UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG, he ought to have considered himself as altogether bound by kindness to so munificent a Prince; but he regarded his elevation as advantageous to him to seek, after his own manner, a new situation. Hence, as soon as hope appeared, he deserted his station, having despised the honorable office which he had fraudulently attained, and passed over to the enemies of true and pure Religion, the name of which he had assumed. And first indeed (as though he retained some portion of shame) he went on stealthily in a clandestine manner, he discussed some secret treacheries with The Cardinal of Lorraine, into whose favor he had insinuated himself. The object of the whole was to subvert the CHURCHES OF FRANCE by means of a spurious doctrine and a mixture of ceremonies. But as there appeared no reward for masked and hidden perfidy, he not only rushed headlong into open defection, but so insolently boasted of his wickedness, that he has surpassed similar apostates in canine wantonness. It is however well, that the perfidy of one unprincipled man does not stop the course of your kindness towards others; and you have some recompense for your perseverance, for among the ornaments of your University are to be found some foreigners well known for their high character, whom it is unnecessary for me to name.
Though I can add nothing to the character of your Highness, either by my praise or by the dedication of this Work, yet I could not restrain myself from doing what I thought to be my duty. Farewell, Most Illustrious Prince. May God enrich you more and more with His spiritual gifts, keep you long in safety, and render your dignified station prosperous to you and yours.
GENEVA, JULY 23, 1563.
THE PRINTER TO THE CHRISTIAN READER,
HEALTH.
THOUGH Readers were sufficiently reminded, when the LECTURES of the beloved and learned JOHN CALVIN, on THE MINOR PROPHETS and on DANIEL, were published, by what means and by whom they had been attained, so that it is to no purpose to sing the same song, for so would I seem to do, were I again to explain at large what has been before set forth; it is yet necessary, if I am not mistaken, to add now, that these LECTURES ON JEREMIAH and the LAMENTATIONS were taken down by our two brethren, John Budeus and Charles Jonville, with the same care, fidelity, and diligence as the former Lectures, which cannot but appear to every one who will attentively read them.
The Hebrew Text has not been inserted; and among other things, for this reason, because it is already possessed by those who understand the language, and to others it would be of no advantage. We were also afraid, that by increasing the Volume and the expense, we should unnecessarily charge the buyer.
But that I may not be prolix and tedious, I pass by the great and manifold benefit that may be derived from this Volume, which will appear to each one better when it is read: for it is so replete with the precious wealth of heavenly Truth, that from it, as from a storehouse, may be drawn the sum and substance of Religion; and so it will no doubt be of great service to the whole Church of God.
It remains for you, Christian Reader, to ascribe to God alone whatever benefit you may derive from these COMMENTARIES; and to pray for CALVIN, who well deserves this from all the godly, until he shall at length enjoy his eternal inheritance. Make use also thankfully of this so valuable a treasure, and judge kindly and impartially of what is cordially presented to you.
GENEVA, JULY 23, 1576.
THE PRAYER WHICH JOHN CALVIN WAS WONT TO USE AT THE BEGINNING OF HIS LECTURES:
MAY the Lord grant, that we may engage in contemplating the mysteries of his heavenly wisdom with really increas — ing devotion, to his glory and to our edification. AMEN.
CALVIN’S PREFACE
TO THE BOOK OF
THE PROPHET JEREMIAH.
LECTURE FIRST.
AFTER having explained THE TWELVE MINOR PROPHETS, we reached at length to the end of DANIEL. I now undertake to explain THE BOOK OF JEREMIAH, provided life be spared and leisure be given me. But if through God’s grace time will be allowed, there will remain still one Prophet, that is, EZEKIEL; which I hope will be undertaken by a more competent Interpreter.
As to JEREMIAH, it must be first observed, that he commenced his office as a Prophet under JOSIAH, and in the thirteenth year of his reign, who was a sincere servant of God, and yet the state of things was then very confused: the Book of the Law was unknown; so that every one indulged his fancy in inventing many impious forms of worship. No doubt at a time when such liberty prevailed, there were many turbulent men laboring to pervert the worship of God and pure doctrine, and fabricating for themselves many absurd things. For if the priests taught rightly, they must have derived all their knowledge from the Law: and though it is probable, that the memory of it was not wholly lost, yet a few fragments only remained, so that they could not with certainty learn how the Church was to be regulated according to what had been received from above. For it is related in sacred history, that the Book was found in the eighteenth year of JOSIAH, (2 Chronicles 34:8, 15;) so that Jeremiah had been then teaching for four, and even for five years.
Now this fact clearly proves how great is the carelessness and sloth of men in the great concerns of Religion. God had commanded Moses, that a copy of the Law should not only be kept reverently and carefully in the Temple, but also by the kings themselves, (Deuteronomy 17:18;) and there was also added a command, that the whole Law should be read to the people at their festivals. (Deuteronomy 31:11.) But when the kings departed from the true worship of God, no copy of the Law was preserved by them: and at length the whole Law became as it were extinct. No doubt this happened through the tyranny of King MANASSE, who cruelly raged against the priests and against all the other servants of God. Wherever only a spark of religion appeared, he was intent on slaughter; so that blood, as sacred history testifies, flowed through all the streets of Jerusalem. (2 Kings 21:16.) It was then no wonder, if he took away from the Temple all the copies of the Law found there, in order to extinguish all memory of true doctrine. However, a book, which had been hid, was found, as we are told, by the priest HILKIAH.
The first thing then to be observed is the time when he began to teach: as religion was then so corrupted, and every one invented errors to suit his own humor, the office of JEREMIAH must have been hard and arduous.
Secondly, the termination of his ministry must be noticed. He says, that from that time he pursued his office until the transmigration. He therefore continued in his course for forty years. We shall hereafter see what hard contests he had to undergo during his life. But had the people been teachable, he could not have performed what God had commanded him without great pain and even weariness: for we shall presently see what was the doctrine which he was commanded to proclaim. As then he was assiduous in his labor for forty years, we hence perceive with what a courageous spirit he was endued. If we further consider what storms had been raised, calculated to cast him down from his high station, and even wholly to drive him from the right way, more clearly still will shine forth the invincible firmness of his mind and his zeal; for he never desisted from executing the office committed to him.
We must further observe, that after the city was cut off, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem were led captives into Babylon, Jeremiah still continued to discharge his office. He was indeed drawn into Egypt, as we learn from the end of his Book, especially from chapter 44 (Jeremiah 44); nay, he was taken there by force, while yet he pronounced a curse on all the Jews who sought hiding — places in Egypt. Though he was forced to go there, yet it much lessened his authority; for we know that ungodly men lay hold on any pretense for evil — speaking. There was here a specious pretense; “He cursed, “they said, “all who went to Egypt, and now where does he dwell himself? In Egypt with the other refugees.” No doubt the faith of the holy man was shaken by these banterings: ungodliness has been wanton in all ages. There, then, after the destruction of the city, Jeremiah was constrained to bend his course: and it may be, that he persevered in his work and labor beyond fifty years. It is said, that he was stoned to death, and not unlikely, for he inveighed with no less severity against the Jews who had fled into Egypt, than against the city while it was standing; and despair might have roused them into madness. It is hence probable that they slew the holy Prophet, and thought this lawful because he upbraided them with their miseries, while his object was to correct their perverseness, which was untamable; and this they did not consider.
I come now to THE CONTENTS of the Book. As ISAIAH and the other Prophets spent their labor almost in vain, nothing remained for JEREMIAH but briefly to announce this sentence, — “ There is now no pardon, but it is the time of extreme vengeance, for they have too long abused God’s forbearance, who has borne with them, kindly and even sweetly exhorted them to repent, and testified that he would be exorable and propitious, provided they returned to the right way.” Since then God’s kindness had been despised by them, it became necessary for Jeremiah to fulminate against them as men lost and in a hopeless state of perverseness. The main thing then in his teaching was this:
“It is all over with the kingdom and the priesthood; for the Jews have so often and in such various ways, and for so long a time, provoked God’s wrath and rejected the pious warnings of his servants.”
ISAIAH also in his time used threatenings; but we see that to mitigate what was terrible, some hope of pardon was added whenever he spoke with severity. But after the ten tribes had been carried into exile, and the kingdom had been visited with various calamities, while the Jews still continued impenitent, and even hardened themselves more and more under God’s scourges, it was necessary, as I have said, that he should deal more sharply with them. God had contended with them by ISAIAH and the other prophets; by JEREMIAH and also by EZEKIEL, he proved them guilty, and denounced on them the sentence of condemnation. This difference between the teaching of Isaiah and that of our Prophet, ought to be noticed. fA5 At the same time, that JEREMIAH’S teaching might not be imperfect, it was God’s purpose that he should be also the herald of his grace and of the salvation promised in Christ. This exception, however, ought to be borne in mind, that he offered them no hope of mercy until they had suffered the punishment due to their sins.
We now then understand what JEREMIAH mainly taught: but particulars will be better and more distinctly understood by readers by following the course of the text. And I do not now treat in general of what is to be found in the prophets; for this is what I have done elsewhere. I now then say only, that JEREMIAH was sent by God to proclaim to the people their last calamity; and also to speak to them of their future redemption, and at the same time, ever to remind them of the interposition of seventy years in exile. I come now to the words.
