CHAPTER I

THERE are four parts of this first Chapter. The first is completed in these two short verses which I have read; and contains the inscription or title prefixed to the Epistle itself. The second comprises a preface adapted to conciliate good-will; from the 3d to the 12th verse. The third part embraces an exposition of doctrine concerning Christ and his benefits ; to verse 23. The last part to the end of the chapter, exhorts to advancement and constancy in the same doctrine.

In the title three things are to be observed: the subscription ; the inscription; and the salutation. The terms subscription and inscription are derived from our custom in letter-writing. For it is usual for the name of the sender to be subscribed to the letter itself; and the name of him to whom it is sent to be inscribed on the back of it. Of these in order.

The Subscription contains three things: the Names of those who send this Epistle, Paul and Timotheus: their different descriptions; the one an Apostle of Christ, the other a brother: the Founder of the apostolic office, Jesus Christ by the will of God. We shall now follow the thread of the context.

Paul.] Ishall say but little concerning the Name, because nothing can be advanced which is either very necessary, or that is not very trite and frequently repeated. It is evident that he had been called Saul. Some therefore allege that he changed his name when he embraced the Christian Religion, that he might declare his change of mind by this circumstance; for from being a proud and haughty Pharisee, he became a lowly and humble disciple of Christ. This opinion is favoured by Augustine in his Exposition of Ps. Ixxii. where he thus comments, At first he was Saul, afterwards Paul ; first proud, afterwards humble ; not as though he changed his name from any vain glory, but because from a proud man, he became lowly; for the word Paulus means little. Others think the Apostle assumed this name after he had brought Sergius Paulus, the Proconsul, to the faith of Christ, as a memorial of so great a conquest. But Luke himself discountenances this, who, in Acts xiii. 9, calls him Paul before the conversion of the Proconsul. A third opinion is that of Origen; who writes that this our Apostle was distinguished from the first by two names; Saul being his family name given him by his parents, to intimate his religion and his origin; Paul being added to shew that he was a citizen of Rome. He uses this latter name in his Epistles, because it was better reputed, and more acceptable among the Gentiles. Indeed the same father shews in the same passage, that it was a common practice among the Jews to take two names. Now if any one wishes for a personal description of Paul, let him consult Nicephorus, lib. i. c. 937 ; his “fe and manners let him seek from Acts viii. ix. xxii. and xxvi.; from Gal. i.; and 1 Tim. i.; his praises from Eusebius, who terms him, the most learned of the Apostles, most powerful in speech and understanding : from Jerome,* who calls him the trumpet of the Gospel, the thunder of the Gentiles, the stream of eloquence, &c. But Chrysostom sets forth his praises most amply, in his discourses, De Pauli laudibus.+

An Apostle.] This is a title of office or dignity. It denotes, if we regard the origin of the term, any man whatever sent by another with a commission; for it is derived from the Greek azocrenciv: but if we attend to the common application of it, it denotes certain select ambassadors of Christ. But, as Thomasf says, in terms we must regard not so much from what they are derived, as to whai purpose intended.

The name, then, of Apostle, according to the use of sacred Scripture, belongs to those only, First, who had. received an immediate call from God to preach the Gospel: He chose twelve, whom he named Apostles, Luke vi. 13, and John xx. 21; As my Father hath sent me even so send I you. Secondly, who had received a certain and infallible knowledge of evangelical doctrine, by the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Christ promised this to them, John xvi. 13, The Spirit of truth shall guide you into all truth; this he fulfilled in Actsii.¹ Thirdly, who had received an authority, not restricted to one place, or to a certain church, but plenary and universal ; Teach all nations, Matth. xxviii. Preach to every creature, Mark xvi. Now it is evident that Paul possessed all these. His immediate call is proved from Acts ix. 15, The Lord said to him (i. e. to Ananias, who had hesitated to seek Paul) Go thy way, for he is a chosen vessel unto me; and Gal. i. 1. His immediate inspiration of the mystery of the Gospel, from Gal. i. 12, I was not taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ, His universal authority, from Acts ix. 15, where he is called a chosen vessel to bear the name of God before the Gentiles and the Children of Israel. And elsewhere he is termed the teacher, not of this or of that church, but of the Gentiles, Rom. i. 5.²³

We have thus proved the Apostleship of Paul. Now let us inquire why in this place, and several others, he makes mention of this his office. First, he does it that he might silence the false Apostles, who whispered in the ears of the people that he was not one of the Apostles, because he had no intercourse with Christ whilst he dwelt upon earth, and because he was not among them when the Holy Spirit in the likeness of tongues of fire sat upon each of them. But notwithstanding this, he styles and proves himself an Apostle, because he was directly called and instructed by Christ, although not at the same time as the rest.

Secondly, he claims the title of an Apostle, that he might make known to the faithful themselves the certainty of his doctrine. For it is absolutely necessary that it should be known whence that doctrine proceeded which is delivered to the Churches; if from human opinion, it cannot be sure and infallible; but if from the ambassadors of God himself, and men inspired by the Holy Spirit for this work of preaching, then we can safely repose faith upon it. Add created truth is liable to error, unless so far as it is rectified by that which is uncreated, Aquinas, quest. disp. de fide, art.8.⁴

Lastly, Paul affixes the name of his office, that he might excite and stir up himself, to fulfil the work of an Apostle. For, in calling himself au Apostle, he owns that the duty of preaching the Gospel was entrusted to him; and woe unto him, if he did not perform it.

Of Jesus Christ.] He dignifies his Apostleship from its Founder.

By the will of God] i. e. Not only by the authority of Christ as man, but by the gift, ordination, and approbation of God. What is here spoken concerning God is to be attributed not to the Father alone, but to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit: for Apostles are appointed by the will and authority of these also. Christ gave Apostles, Ephes. iv. 11. The Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul, Acts xiii. 2. Neither can the will of these, whose essence is one, be dissevered. Paul therefore was called and chosen to the Apostleship ; the sacred Trinity so willing, ordering, and ordaining it. The Apostle adduced this that the Colossians, to whom he was personally un- . known, might understand that he did not write these things rashly, or intrude himself into the concerns of that church ; but that he did it in virtue of his apostolic office and authority, whereby the care of all the churches rested upon him. And so he was able, though absent, to direct the faithful, to reprove seducers, and to support the sinking state of that church. For all these things were enjoined and imposed upon him by the will of God. Thus much concerning Paul.

And Timotheus our Brother.]. Concerning Timothy very excellent testimonies are found in the Scriptures. He was descended from pious ancestors, as appears from Acts xvi. and 2 Tim. 1. 5. He himself also was pious and faithful, as this our Apostle in many places testifies. He calls him Ais work-fellow, Rom. xvi. 21; a Son dearly beloved and faithfulin the Lord, 1 Cor. iv. 17 ; most learned in the Scriptures, 2 Tim. iii. 15; and he honours him with many other commendations. But in this place he calls him Brother, either on account of his agreement in religion and true doctrine with Paul, or from that common respect whereby all Christians call one another Brethren ; because they are presumed to be children by adoption of the same heavenly Father.

It may be objected, Paul was tlie instrument of the Spirit in delivering the doctrine of this Epistle : why then does he associate Timothy with himself?

We answer; Three causes are alleged, why, in the title of this Epistle, he chose to join the name of Timothy with his own.

First, to shew that he did not preach any other doctrine to them than that very doctrine which Timothy approved, who was in repute among them. For although the doctrine of Paul does not require any outward recommendation, yet the agreement and concord of ministers in the same doctrine contributes much to persuasion. Secondly, to render Timothy more acceptable to that church, whilst in this subscription he unites him to himself as an equal. Lastly, because perhaps Timothy was his amanuensis in writing this Epistle.

Thus far we have explained the subscription. Now let us unfold the doctrines.

Paul calls himself an Apostle of Christ, and that by the will of God: What do we gather from hence?

1. That faith is to be yielded equally to these writings of Paul, as if Christ himself or God were speaking from heaven. For an Apostle is the ambassador of God, the amanuensis of the Holy Spirit. Among believers, therefore, they are received on their own authority, nor need any external or human testimony, any more than Christ himself needed it. If any one should enquire, Whence do you know these Scriptures to have proceeded from men inspired by Divine illumination, and not from impostors ? I answer: This principle applies to all other things, That you should understand what it behoves you to believe : but this faith is the gift of God. Thus says Augustine,⁵ Confess. lib. 6. cap. 5, Thou hast persuaded me, O God; that not those wha have believed thy books, but those who have not believed them are to be blamed ; neither should they be listened to, if any by chance should say, Whence do you know these books to be furnished to the human race by the Spirit of the only true God ?

2. That it is useful and necessary for all ministers of the Gospel oftentimes to bring to mind, what office and what station they hold in the church; that having their vocation continually in remembrance they may endeavour to fulfil their duty to the utmost of their power. For he who is always reminding himself, I am a Bishop, I am a Presbyter, must needs at the same time understand, that it s not allowable for him to indulge in idleness, or natural inclination, but that he must keep his eye on his flock. It is scandalous to be compelled to say of ministers what Tacitus (Hist. 3) writes of Licinius, Such a torpor had invaded his mind, that unless others reminded him that he was a prince, he himself would have forgotten it.

3. That it is incumbent upon those appointed to ecclesiastical dignity, not only to discharge the duties of their office, but to defend the authority and respectability of that office against obstinate and schismatical revilers. For so Paul claims to himself apostolic dignity not from self-con- Sequence, but lest the contempt of his authority should bring into contempt that of the Church: for contempt of religion itself always follows contempt of those who are at the head of the church and direct the affairs of religion.⁶ Hence Paul advised Timothy so to conduct himself, as that mo one should despise his youth, 1 Tim. iv. 12.

It would be easy to deduce from these instructions many things adapted to form and correct the manners; but that may be left to your own industry and prudence.t I shall add two things only, which, from the declaration that Paul was made an Apostle by the will of God, conduce greatly to the comfort of the godly. It hence appears, a

1. That God cannot but prove efficient when those means are used for the salvation of men which he himself hath ordained for that purpose. Although, therefore, the preaching of the Gospel by men weak, despised, defiled by sin, may seem an insignificant means to the attainment of human salvation ; yet, since it is the ordinance and will of God, it will prove most effectual: for the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than man, 1 Cor. i. 25. There will be no need therefore to expect either an angel from heaven, or extraordinary visions and divine revelations; we have. only to hearken to apostolic doctrine, and it will be the power of God to salvation to all that believe.⁷

2. It also follows, that this appointment of Apostles by the will of God, discovers to us the wonderful love of God towards mankind, and his inexpressible desire of our salvation. For what else is sending Apostles into the world, than sending ambassadors who should pray and intreat men that they would be reconciled to God; that they would embrace the offered salvation? Hence Paul calls the apostolic work the ministry of reconciliation, and says, 2 Cor. v. 20, Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us, we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye . reconciled to God. Behold the goodness and loving-kindness of God, and that spontaneous, not called for, as Tertullian says, by us.

Now, in the last place, it will not be foreign to our purpose to scrutinize that apostolic dignity which the Pope claims to himself. For on all occasions he vaunts about the Apostolic See, Apostolic Benedictions, Apostolic Anathemas; in short, boasts of every thing Apostolic. Where- c fore from what has been explained above concerning the nature of an Apostle, this question arises, Whether the Pope of Rome has, or has not, the apostolic dignity and authority ?

Bellarmin,⁸ De pontif. Rom. lib. 1. cap. 9, asserts the apostolic authority to be permanent in the successor of Peter alone, because supreme and universal power was given to Peter as to an ordinary Pastor,⁹ who should have successors; but to the other Apostles, as to delegates, who should not. The Pope of Rome is therefore alone the Apostolic Pontiff, his only the Apostolic See, and his office that of an Apostle.

But on the contrary, the nature of an Apostle demands that a man be immediately called by God to that office ; that he be also instructed in evangelical truth immediately, by the infallible inspiration of the Holy Spirit: but this is more than the advocates of the Papacy themselves dare arrogate to the Pope. He is not immediately called by God, but chosen by the Cardinals, and that very often through the intervention of intrigue and the basest fraud. His knowledge of sacred learning (if he has any) is acquired by study and industry, not inspired like that of the Apostles. Therefore although they may call him an Apostle, we shall conclude with Tertullian, advers. Marc. lib. 1, The name is assigned in mockery to him to whom the nature implied in the name is denied.¹⁰

Secondly, an Apostle is bound to the preaching of the Gospel ( Woe is me, if I preach not the Gospel), and that not in any one particular church, but every where: but the Roman Pontiffs do not think themselves obliged to preach through all the world, neither do they exercise that office atall: therefore they either lie when they call themselves Apostles, or act wickedly in neglecting to discharge the peculiar functions of an Apostle.

But perhaps it will be said, they send out preachers by their authority, and gather new churches in the Indies, and in the most remote parts of the world; and this property belongs to apostolic authority.

I answer, Nothing is less apostolic than to remain at home at ease, and send out others to labour : the Apostles indeed had inferior ministers under them, whose assistance they made use of; but they themselves in the mean time did not omit the preaching of the Gospel. Since therefore the apostolic work is not found in the Pope, neither is the apostolic nature: for every thing evinces its own proper nature by its operations.¹¹ Add to this that he hath neither the power of working miracles, nor of conferring the Holy Spirit; and yet these were united in all who received apostolic authority from Christ. When the advocates of . the Pontiffs are pressed with these clear reasons, they are compelled to shuffle, and to attribute a sort of half and mutilated apostolic authority to their Pope. So Bellarmin, lib. ii. de Rom, Pont. cap. 12, says, Three things are comprised in the Apostleship : First, that a man be immediately called and taught by God; and this he confesses that his Romish Apostle hath not: Secondly, that he should establish churches in those places where they never were : Thirdly, that he should have the chief power over all churches, and be the Ordinary of the whole Church : and he says these two marks of the Apostleship do meet in the Roman Pontiff. But Cajetan, in tract. 3, de Rom. Pont. institut. confesses, If we must speak formally and exactly, Peter had no successor in his Apostleship more than the rest of the Apostles: but beyond this Apostleship he was the ordinary Pastor of the whole world : in this office of superintending the universal Church the Pope succeeds him, and so far his chair is called A postolic.¹²

But neither must we concede this to the defenders of the Papacy. First, because God doth not set over the Catholic Church any universal Bishop fortified with apostolic authority, who may err, and draw those under him into errors. With this argument Gregory checked the pride of John of Constantinople. He says, Epist. lib. 4, cap. 76, The Catholic Church must needs miscarry, when he falls who is called Universal.¹³ But it is agreed amongst the defenders of the Papacy themselves, that the Pope may become an heretic, and in such case ought to be deposed. Distinct. 40, Can. Si Papa.

Secondly, he is not the universal Pastor of the Church, who, by virtue of his ordination, is bound to his own particular See: but the Roman Bishop, like any other, is bound down to his See, and to his Church of Rome; or, if he hath any more extended prerogative, he hath it by human, not by Divine right. And yet it is not of men, but of God alone to confer apostolic authority. So Cyprian: No one of us appoints himself a Bishop of bishops. Be he whom you will, he has but the free control over his own jurisdiction. Afterwards he subjoins that the authority of 14 AN EXPOSITION CF ST. PAUL’S Chap. a. the African Bishops is no less than that of the Roman¹⁴ If however they will not hear Cyprian, yet they will not reject the Council of Nice, which restricts that Ecumenical Bishop within his own limits; vide Can. 6.¹⁵

Lastly, an universal and apostolic Bishop may every where ordain Bishops and Pastors of his own right: but if the Pope should ordain a Bishop out of his own province, that would not be a lawful ordination ; for so it was held by the Synod above-mentioned. It is quite clear that if any one be made a Bishop without the consent of the Metropolitan, that Synod determined him not to be a Bishop.[ Cajetan meets this argument ridiculously, by in 1825, observed in the Church of St. Maria della Modestia (formerly a Temple of Romulus), in the Via Sacra, an inscription in Italian literally thus: “ The portrait of the most blessed Mary over the high altar spoke to Pope St. Gregory saying, ‘ Wherefore dost thou no longer do me reverence?? The Saint asked pardon, and granted to those who celebrate Mass at this altar the liberation of a soul from purgatory, i. e. of that soul for which the Mass is said.” It is thus the Church of Rome has drawn to herself that wealth whereby she has maintained her power. Gregory was most severe in the point of celibacy of priests; but discouraged the persecution of the Jews. 3 saying, It is one thing to speak concerning authority, and another thing concerning the execution of it: that the Pope hath the authority of ordaining in the provinces of other Bishops ; but that custom has established his non-exertion of this authority. If he hath this authority by right, it could not be so abolished by custom as to make that ordination actually unlawful which he might effect without the consent of the Metropolitan ; for custom does not prescribe where a thing is forbidden by an express law, says Hostiensis.¹⁶ We do not deny that prerogatives have been conthe close of the fourth century, in giving his sense of the 6th Canon of this Synod, is admitted to have stated it truly and clearly ; viz. That the ancient custom be kept both in Alexandria and Rome; that he (the Bishop of Alexandria) have the care of Egypt; the other (the Bishop of Rome) of : the Suburbicary Churches, i. e. over all those places in Italy, Sicily, Sardi- ^ nia, Corsica, &c. over which the Preefect, or the Vicar of the City of Rome, had jurisdiction in temporal affairs. And even the old Latin paraphrastical Version of these Canons confines the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome to the Suburbicary Churches. And not only these two Editions of the Canons, but those of other writers on them, call the several districts in which the Bishops of Rome and Alexandria exercised their jurisdiction, Provinces ; whereas the district of a Patriarch was always called his Diocese, that of an inferior Bishop his Parish: And therefore by Metropolitans here must be meant those who had the largest Provinces, or were the most remarkable on account of the largeness of cities, and had a proportionable deference paid to them. The reason why such particular care was taken of the privileges of the Bishop of Alexandria was, that Meletius, Bishop of Lycopolis, being deposed about twenty years before this Council, by Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, in a provincial Synod, for idolatry and other crimes, did yet ordain several Bishops and Clergymen in Egypt, without the consent, and in opposition to the sentence passed against him by the Bishop and Synod. Against this the 4th Canon of the Council was probably framed:—“ A Bishop ought to be constituted by all the Bishops that belong to the Province; but if this be not practicable, by reason of urgent necessity, or the length of the way, Three must by all means meet together, and when they have the consent of those that are absent, signified by letter, then let them perform the ordination ; and the ratification of what is done must be allowed to the Metropolitan in every Province.”¹⁷¹⁸¹⁹

Let it further be observed, that the authority of Metropolitans must have been much older than this Synod ; for here their privileges are called ancient customs. Vide Johnson’s Clergyman’s Vade Mecum. ceded to the Roman Church, and to the Bishop of Rome, by the ancients ; but not because²⁰of his being the ordinary Pastor of the whole Church, and armed with apostolic authority by right Divine, but on account of the sobriety, the consistency, and the distinguished learning of those who, in the earliest times, were set over that Church ; on account of the dignity of the city of Rome, which was the seat of empire; and, lastly, as Gerson says, by the gracious and voluntary concession of other churches.

Now let us sift a few arguments of our opponents.

1. Pellarmin, lib. 2, De Rom. Pont. cap. 12, says, Peter had the government of the whole church committed to him ; but some one ought to succeed therein as supreme head by Divine right ; and this successor can be no other than the Pope.

I answer, there is nothing solid in this argument. First, as it regards Peter, to whom they say the government of the whole church was committed when it was said to him alone, John xxi. 15—17, Feed my sheep. I confess, in his character of Apostle, the power of feeding the flock of Christ every where was given to Peter; but this was common to him with the rest of the Apostles, to whom also it was said, Go, teach all nations, Matth. xxviii. 19. Secondly, we deny that successors were appointed in this apostolic power either to Peter or any one of the Apostles ; for not fresh Apostles, but Bishops, succeeded to Apostles. Thirdly, if we allow a successor to Peter in apostolic power, he will not be, by Divine authority, the Roman Pontiff; because no Divine authority appropriated the Roman See to Peter. Whence even Cusa²¹ does not hesitate to confess, that, if a Bishop of Treves should be chosen for the head of the Church, he would be more properly the successor of Peter than the Roman Bishop.²²

2. They argue, the Church is one body, and hath one head on earth besides Christ: but any other head on earth besides the Pope is assigned by no one; therefore he is the head and sovereign of the whole Church. And that it has a head on earth, he (Bellarmin) proves from those words, 1 Cor. xii. 21. The head cannot say to the feet I have no need of you; but Christ can say this; therefore there Is a head in the Church besides Christ.

I answer; Although the Church be one body, and militant here in earth, yet no necessity obliges us to confess any earthly head of the whole Church; because Christ, who is ascended into heaven, is also in the world by his Spirit, and quickens and rules the whole Church ; but he forms particular churches, and governs them by particular prelates and ministers. The plea, however, which he brings from the Scripture is futile and childish: for the Apostle means not by the head and the feet, the Pope and the Church; but by the head, any man in the church endowed with eminent gifts; by the feet, any humble or inferior per- . son. This will readily appear if we weigh the scope of the passage. For he is not cautioning Peter against lording it over the Church; but he is warning those who were distinguished by spiritual gifts among the Corinthians, against despising their inferiors ; as Chrysostom, Ambrose, and Aquinas explain it.²³²⁴

3. The Church would not be governed in the best way unless it were governed by one supreme spiritual head; but Christ left the Church instituted and governed in the best manner ; therefore by one.

I answer; Christ alone is the spiritual Sovereign of the whole Church; but to institute an earthly sovereign, on whose will the whole Church should depend, would be the worst mode of governing the Church; because no mortal can discharge that office even moderately well. For how shall the Pope sitting in the Vatican, take care of the churches of the Indians or the Ethiopians? But that Pontiff does not aim at the care of churches, but at empire.

4. The Church is always increasing, and it must increase until the Gospel be preached in all the world: but this cannot be done unless there be one chief president, on whom the apostolic charge and trouble of preserving the whole Church and of extending it, may devolve; for no one ought to preach unless he be sent; and no particular Bishop can send beyond his own province. Scripture, much akin in fallacy and plausibility to the one above, but managed with more ingenuity. For, with the most artful sophistry, carried on through two pages, he labours to prove that the words of our Lord to Peter, recorded John xxi. 15—17, “ Feed my lambs ; feed my sheep,” were 2 commission to Peter, in the first place to govern the faithful intended by the lambs ; in the next, a jurisdiction over the pastors of the faithful, conveyed in the words * Feed my sheep.” The consequence, he concludes is, that * since Christ gives Peter 2 superintendence over his whole flock, he confers upon him a jurisdiction distinct from that of the rest of the Apostles—a jurisdiction more enlarged than theirs jurisdiction reaching over the whole body of the Church, over the taught and the teachers, over the governed and the governors.” So that, as the Rev. Joseph Fletcher, in his excellent volume of “ Lectures on the Principles and Institutions of the Roman Catholic Religion,” justly observes, “ according to this arguing the * lambs’ mean the * sheep,’ and the * sheep’ mean the shepherds!!!” Tt is to be believed, that this is the general mode of Popish instruction. The recently published discourses of a neighbouring Priest, under every cautionary restraint, might be adduced as containing abundant evidence of the truth of the assertion ; and, more recently still, a distinguished Papal Orator, in the town where the Translator writes, was heard, in his ordinary pulpit exercises, labouring to establish his auditory in the belief of the doctrine of Transubstantiation, by attempting to prove, that it was the uniform and universal belicf of the Christians of the first four centuries of the Christian era !!!

I answer; To send preachers to infidel nations is not now the work of apostolic power, but of Christian charity. Every Bishop therefore in the vicinity of any heathen nation, may, from the duty of charity, either by himself, or by others, preach the Gospel to them ; and, if they should embrace the Christian faith, what is to hinder Bishops and ministers being set over them (if they require it) legitimately ordained by any other Bishop? To extend the Church therefore there is no need of a new Apostle.

We conclude, then, since the Pope of Rome is not immediately called by Christ—nor embued with Evangelical knowledge by direct and extraordinary inspiration of the Holy Spirit—nor endowed with universal power over the whole Church, he can by no mode of reasoning be styled : an Apostle, or Apostolic Bishop.²⁵

Ver. 2.

In these words is contained the second part of the title, which we call the Inscription, in which the Apostle describes both the place where they dwell, and the character- . istics of those to whom the Epistle is sent: and this is entitled the superscription or inscription according to our custom, who are in the habit of inscribing these circumstances on the back of our letters, as we have before remarked.

The persons saluted then have a threefold description ; First, from the place in which they live; 2. From three especial properties, holiness, fidelity, brotherhood; 3. From the Author of all, viz. Christ Jesus: for they are saints in Christ, faithful in Christ, and brethren in Christ.

Concerning the Colossians we have spoken already in the preface; nor is it necessary to add more. This only we shall observe by the way, that although the Catholic Church can never wholly perish, yet each particular church may fall away from the true religion. This happened to these Colossians; and to all the churches which Paul honoured with his Epistles: for either they were entirely swept away by Mahometan perfidy, or corrupted by some foul superstition. All boast about local succession, therefore, is empty, unless a succession of true doctrine be likewise proved. They are not the children of saints, says Jerome, who hold the place of saints, but they who practise their deeds. Disease succeeds to health in the same person, darkness to light; so, in the same land, superstition may succeed to Religion, unbelief to faith. But let this suffice here.

Saints.] That is, sanctified by the laver of baptism. Whence, says the Apostle, 1 Cor. vi. 11, Ye are washed, ye are sanctified. But when the Apostle calls all baptised persons suits, he speaks according to the rule of charity, which directs us to presume good of every one, unless the contrary be shewn. And for the very best reason baptised persons are called saints. For saintship imports two things: First, cleansing from impurity: whence Isidore writes, That a saint is so called from two words sanguine tinctum ; i. e. £o be as it were tinged with blood ; because anciently they who wished to be purified, were sprinkled with the blood of the sacrifice.* Secondly, it denotes a special dedication to the Divine worship: whence we call not only men, but temples and vessels, holy; because they are set apart to sacred uses in the worship of God. In both these respects.a baptised Christian is rightly called a saint.²⁶

For, first, he is in baptism cleansed from original corruption, and the imputation of all sins. Whence it is called, in Titus iii. 5, the laver of regeneration. And in Acts ii. 38, it is said, Be baptised every one of you for the remission of sins. Hence also that saying of Nazianzen, The water cleanses the body visibly; the Spirit accompanying it also invisibly cleanses the soul. Hence also that ancient custom of putting white robes upon baptised persons; by which ceremony they signified the purification of their souls effected by virtue of holy baptism, as Lactantius ex- . presses in that line, De Pascha v. 93,

Fulgentes animas vestis quoque candida signal : Likewise the white raiment betokens their resplendent souls.

Neither does this purification consist alone in the washing away of sins, but in the combined infusion of spiritual graces; of which subject Parisiensis elegantly writes,²⁷ Like as a royal treasurer gives the gifts promised by the king to him who produces the royal signet ; so the Holy Spirit, the dispenser of spiritual gifts, imparts spiritual graces to those whom he beholds bewing the sign of holy baptism. Peter promises this to the baptised, Acts ii. 38, Be baptised every one of you in the name of Christ, AND YE SHALL RECEIVE THE GIFT OF THE HoLY Ghost. And this is the first reason why Paul calls baptised persons saints.²⁸

Secondly, they are called saints, because in baptism they are in an especial manner dedicated to the service of God. For in baptism a covenant is entered into with God. He receives us under his protection; we acknowledge him for our Lord, and renounce all other lords, viz. the world, the flesh, and the devil. We are therefore, as it were, certain consecrated vessels, set apart from profane uses to the sacred service of God. In this respect Nazianzen calls baptism, the covenant of a more holy life with God; and Peter, 1 Epis. iii. 21, the answer (extputmua) of a good conscience towards God.

From the consideration of this characteristic many inferences might be deduced ; we shall deduce three.

1. Whereas the Apostle calls not this or that good man, but the Colossians promiscuously, saints, as many as put on Christ by baptism; hence we learn, that we must think and speak well of all who profess religion, unless by clear and manifest deeds they shew themselves to be ungodly and hypocrites. For the Apostles always, when they descend to particular men or churches, presume every Christian to be elect, sanctified, justified, and in the way of being glorified, until he himself shall have proved himself to be wicked or an apostate. So Paul writing to the Corinthians affirms indiscriminately concerning them, Ye are washed, ye are sanctified, ye are justified, 1 Cor. vi. 11. For as in those things which relate to faith, we must speak and think according to Scripture, which is a certain and infallible rule: so, in other things which relate to charity, it is sufficient to think and to speak according to the probability of appearances. This rule may deceive; yet not by any fault or hazard of him who thought better of another than he truly deserved, but rather of that hypocrite, who was a different and much worse man than he appeared or seemed to be.²⁹

Secondly, Whereas all of us who have been baptised are called saints, we are admonished of our duty, which is to SERVE GoD IN HOLINESS AND RIGHTEOUSNESS ALL THE DAYS OF OUR LIFE. For if we are without the life of saints, the name of saints will profit us nothing. The participation of names or titles, says Tertullian, determines not the real state of things. Although therefore hypocrites may be classed under the same denomination with true saints, yet they shall not receive the same rewards from Him who searches hearts.

Lastly, Whereas we are called saints because we have been consecrated to the service of God in baptism, it plainly follows, that every Christian who serves the devil, the flesh, or the world, is guilty of sacrilege ; for he perverts vessels consecrated to God, i.e. his body and his mind, to profane, nay to devilish uses. Well spake the Orator, It is established by the common law of nations, that mortals may not appropriate to their use that which is consecrated to the service of the immortal gods. But how much more shameful and abominable is it, that the devil should be allowed to take for his use a Christian, holy, and dedicated to God by baptism.³⁰

So much concerning the first property.

Faithful.] This is the second property wherewith the Apostle dignifies the Colossians. Some would have this title to be an explanation of the former; as though the Apostle had said, We, by the law of charity, judge all Christians holy ; but they alone are accounted saints before God who are truly faithful: For God purifies the hearts of men by faith, Acts xv. 9. For although the sacraments are not only signs representing, but also offering grace, yet unbelief spurns and repels the grace offered by God. Hence that very remarkable saying of Augustine, Whence is there so much virtue in the water, that it should but touch the body, and cleanse the heart, except by the word making it so ; not because it is spoken, but because it is believed? And Tertullian reproves those who think that the ungodly and unbelievers are made partakers of the grace offered in the sacraments: Certain persons, says he, so think, as though God were bound to perform even to the unworthy what he hath promised, and they make his liberality to be compulsory. But God watches over his treasury, nor suffers the unworthy to steal in.

Others by faithful, understand those who persevere in faith received. For it is very probable that some were drawn away from evangelical doctrine by those who, in the place of the Gospel, obtruded philosophical speculations and Jewish ceremonies. By this term therefore he both commends those who remained stedfast in the true doctrine of faith, and obliquely rebukes others, who, following those new teachers, turned aside from the faith of the Gospel to errors and superstitions; and he points them out as unworthy his salutation. Therefore to be initiated into the Christian profession by baptism avails nothing unless there. be a stedfast continuance in the same. Not faith received, but faith retained, quickens, says Cyprian, Epist. lib. epist. 5.³¹

Brethren.] The Colossians, and so indeed all Christians and faithful are called brethren for many reasons :

First, on account of their profession of one Religion, and the worship of one and the same God. For Scripture calls all those brethren who profess the same Religion. So Deut. xviii. 20, Let not the king’s heart be lifted up against his brethren; and Matth. xxiii. 8, Be not ye called Rabbi; for one is your Master, and all ye are BRETHREN. Secondly, faithful and godly men are called brethren, because of the fraternal affection and love which ever flourishes among them. This fraternal charity the Apostles every where inculcate. Thus Rom. xii. 10, Be hindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love. “This brotherly love Tertullian calls, the jewel of the Christian name: for true love is the heritage of Christians. Thirdly, we are called brethren, because we have one and the same father, i.e. God. For all the godly are by regeneration and adoption children of God himself, and thenceforward brethren with one another. He gave them power to become the sons of God, John i. 12. Lastly, we are called brethren, because we are grafted into the same mystical body of Christ, and are quickened by one and the same Spirit. As therefore they are brethren naturally, who have derived natural life and descent from the same parents; so they are brethren spiritually who derive their spiritual life and origin from the same principles.

Hence we are taught how great ought to be the concord among Christians ; how far they ought to be removed from hatred and envy; how wicked it is to rejoice in the evil or disgrace of another; and various lessons of the same kind. For among brethren there ought to be a common feeling of fear, joy, grief. They ought not to raise themselves upon each other’s ruin, nor by the fall of one to seek their own elevation.³²

In Christ Jesus.] The Apostle has dignified the Colossians with the brilliant titles of holiness, fidelity, brotherhood : now he shews from whence they obtained these so eminent endowments, viz. from Jesus Christ, the author and giver of them all.

First, as to our holiness: we are rightly called saints in Christ Jesus, because only by the Spirit of Christ, and by virtue of his blood, are we cleansed from our sins, and sanctified in the sacrament of baptism. The water represents externally the pledge of grace; but the Spirit internally works the works of grace, August. Epist. And upon’ Psalm Ixxxvi. Preserve my soul for I am holy, the same Father says, /f thou shalt say that thou art holy of thyself, thou art proud; Again, being a believer in Christ, and a member of Christ, if thou shalt not acknowledge thyself to be holy thou art ungrateful— Say unto God, I am holy, for Thou hast sanctified me, Moreover we are called saiuts in Christ, because not only does he effect our sanctification, but by a gratuitous imputation he communicates to us his righ- ! teousness and perfect holiness, Phil. iii. 9.

Secondly, we are also called faithful in Christ Jesus ; as well because true faith always looks to Christ Jesus, and acknowledges him the only Mediator and Saviour of the human race, as because that Christ by his Spirit works in us both our holiness and our faith.

Lastly, as to our brotherhood; we are also called 5;ethren in Christ Jesus. For whether we be called brethren on account of our agreement in faith and religion, Christ is the only Teacher of the Christian faith and of religion ; or on account of brotherly affection, Christ hath shed abroad this love in our hearts; or on account of God being the common Parent of us all, we are adopted through Christ and in Christ among the children of God; or, lastly, on account of our being grafted into one mystical body; Christ is the Head of this body.³³

Hence we learn, that there is no sanctity, or faith, or brotherhood of any avail to salvation, unless it be grounded in Christ. For Jews, Mahometans, Heretics, have a certain sanctity of their own, a faith of their own, and also a brotherhood of their own: but all these they have apart from Christ. A Jew wishes to be sanctified ; but by the rites of Moses, not by the blood of Christ. A Mahometan wishes to be accounted faithful ; yet not in Christ, but the most wicked impostor Mahomet. A Papist wishes to be a brother ; but a Fraciscan, a Dominican, and any thing rather than a Christian brother; which name among them is base in comparison with those novel fraternities.

And thus far as to the Inscription.

Here the Translator must be permitted to observe, if such be the doctrine of the Gospel, as hath been thus shewn by our Expositor—if such the obligations entailed and required by Baptism, and by our taking upon us the Christian name through that sacramental rite; then, from what have we fallen in the last century? What have multitudes in this Christian country been doing; in reviling the saints of God and pouring contempt upon that holy Name; plunging into all the pomps and vanities they pledged themselves to renounce; abandoning their first principles and plainest duties; breaking the unity of the household of faith ; neglecting the service of God ; and so, bringing into contempt the Religion to which they had sworn subjection, and which they ought to have cherished, adorned, and promoted to the utmost of their power! And if these things have constituted the national guilt of this Country, can any wonder that God should have permitted us to be subjected to our enemies, and exposed again to the influence, and perhaps, the domination of Infidelity and Popery ?

We come now to the latter half of the second verse.

Grace be with you and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

In these words is contained the third part of the title, which we call the Salutation; wherein two things are to be remarked: the blessings which the Apostle desires for the Colossians; viz. grace and peace; and the authors of these blessings, God the Father and Christ.

Grace be with you.] In the first place we may make this general remark, that the Apostles changed or rather amplified the ancient salutation of the Hebrews. For their usual salutation was, Peace be to thee: but after the mystery of human redemption was revealed, in which God opened the fountain of grace to mankind, they also added grace. And these two blessings are thus united for the best possible reason. For grace is introductory good; peace is final good: he therefore who wishes these two blessings to any one, includes also every intermediate benefit. But let us consider them separately. The term grace denotes three things: First, the gratuitous act of the Divine will accepting man in Christ, and ] mercifully pardoning his sins. This is the primary meaning of this word, which the Apostle every where enforces, By grace are ye saved, Ephes. ii. 5. Being justified freely by his grace, Rom. ii. 24. This gratuitous love of God is the Jirst gift, says Altissiodorensis, in which all other gifts are bestowed. Aquinas acknowledges this grace of acceptation, Quest. disp. de grat. art. 1. Secondly, under this term grace the Apostle comprises all those habitual gifts which God infuses for the sanctification of the soul. So faith, love, and all virtues and salutary endowments are called graces. The words of the Apostle in Ephes. iv. 7. have this sense: To every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. The Papists acknowledge this inherent grace almost exclusively; and in the mean time think too lightly of that accepting grace which is the fountain and well-spring of it. Lastly, grace denotes the actual assistance of God, whereby the regenerate, after having received habitual grace, are strengthened to perform good works, and to persevere in faith and godliness. For to man renewed and sanctified by grace, the daily aid of God is still necessary for every single act. When therefore the Apostle wishes grace to the Colossians, he desires for them the gratuitous favour of God, the habitual gifts of sanctification, and the unceasing actual assistance of God. The union of all these is necessary : inherent grace is not given unless the grace of acceptance has preceded it; neither being given is it available to the production of fruits, unless also the efficacious help of God follow and accompany it through every individual action.

And peace.] The Hebrews used this expression as we use the expression health or joy: it signifies a state of things prosperous, and flowing according to our wish, marked by no calamities either public or private. So Gen. xlii. 27, Is there peace to your father? or, as we render it, Is your father well? According to Tremellius,* Is he doing prosperously ? And in Psalm exxii.6, Pray ye for the peace of Jerusalem (i. e. Ask for those things which pertain thereto). But with the Apostles it is used in a more extensive sense, and comprehends, in a more especial manner, spiritual joy and prosperity. Therefore under this term peace Paul, in the first place, desires for them internal peace, or peace of conscience, which arises from the grace of God accepting us for Christ’s sake: hence said Christ, John xiv. 27, My peace I give unto you; and the Apostle, Rom. v. 1, Being justified by faith we have peace with God. Tlus is that peace which passeth all understanding, and it fortifies and guards the heart of a good manas with a military garrison; so Phil. iv. 7, Qpoupice: taj wapMag Uudr, it shall keep your hearts.³⁴

Secondly, as Jerome explains it, he wishes them brotherly peace ; for so he means in that passage, Pacem rumpentes gratiam excludunt—breaking peace they exclude grace. And this peace is both a great and desirable good, and very frequently celebrated by the Apostles, and acknowledged as the special gift of God ; whence it is said, 1 Cor. xiv. 33, He is the God of peace and not of confusion, and elsewhere (2 Cor. xiii. 11), the God of peace and love. The seeds of schism had been scattered abroad ; there was need therefore of peace.

Lastly, he wishes also that external peace, viz. the wellbeing of the Colossian Church, and of all the individuals. in it; but yet only so far as it does not militate against their spiritual good: for sometimes it conduces more to the welfare of the faithful that they be afflicted than that they enjoy external peace and tranquillity.

This is the sum of the apostolic wish : from whence we may gather many things worthy of observation.

From the order itself we are taught three things :

1. Inasmuch as he places grace before peace, he teaches l us that this is first of all to be desired, that we may have God propitious. If he be hostile, even blessings will be turned into a curse.

2. He teaches besides, that true peace cannot belong except to those only who are in favour with God. There is no peace to the wicked, i. e. to the man not reconciled by Christ. :

3. Lastly; from the very order in which these benefits ere placed, he shews that all good things which fall to the lot of the godly, are as it were streams from this fountain of divine grace.

From the thing itself desired;

4. Paul shews us by his own example the duty of every minister of the Gospel; which is, not only to preach grace and peace to his people, but from their inmost souls to intreat and implore the same from God by incessant prayer: neither is sufficient of itself.

5. He reproves the folly of this world, in which almost all wish for themselves and their friends, health, riches, and honours; but grace, peace, and other spiritual good things, they neither regard, nor think of. But Christ commands us to seek first the kingdom of God, Matt. vi. 33.

6. He comforts the godly and faithful by shewing them that the grace of God, and the peace of God they always possess; in comparison of which good things whatsoever fall to the wicked are filth and refuse—cxíga^»a. A God appeased, says Bernard, tranquillizes all things, and to behold him at peace is to be ourselves at peace. Bernard, in Cant. 33.³⁵ ‘

And so far as to the blessings desired. We shall now speak of the Authors of them, whom the Apostle designates in these words following,

From God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ. In which words he points out both the fountain and the channel of all grace, and he describes both by their relation to us:

From God our Father.] The fountain of grace is God himself. For if by grace we understand the gratuitous love of God towards us, this love flows immediately from the Divine will, is not called forth by human merit: Hence says Gad, Jerem. xxxi. 3, I have loved thee with an everlasting love; therefore with loving-kindness have I drawn thee. And most divinely does Bernard speak, in Cant. Serm. 59, And God loveth: not that he derives this from any other source, but from himself the fountain of love; and therefore his love is the more intense, not so much because He hath love, as because he is himself love. 1 John iv. 16. The love of God does not find us worthy, but makes us worthy of his love.—If we understand by grace the habitual gifts of holiness, it is manifest all these emanate from God alone to our souls. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, James i. 17; which the Schoolmen shew by many reasonings ; viz. That nothing can be a physically operating cause in the production of grace but God alone. 1. The infusion or the production of grace is analogous to the manner of creation; inasmuch as it neither has any innate cause in the subject in which it acts, nor any materials by whose capabilities it might be educed by a natural agent: it is there- T fore of God alone, who out of nothing made all things, to infuse and impress grace: God will give grace and glory, Ps. Ixxxiv. 12.

2. Grace arises out of the supernatural participation of God; but it is the work of the divine goodness only to communicate himself in this gratuitous manner to his creature. . . 9. Grace is not imprinted on the soul, unless by that cause which is able to work immediately in the soul itself; but it is the privilege of God alone to be able to glide into the human soul, and to change and incline it by internal operation : Therefore God is the fountain of grace. Hence the error of Thomas,³⁶ with Bellarmin and his other followers appears evident, who attribute to external sacraments a physical causation of grace.

Our Father.] God, as God, as Creator, wills good to all his creatures, but not all good. For he wills the communication of the good things of nature not only to wicked men, but to the very brutes; because he bestows them as the Author of nature: but the good things of saving grace he communicates to his children alone; because these he dispenses as the Father of mercy. And for this reason the Apostle added Our Father. On this account the Saviour when he prescribed a form of prayer, taught us to invoke Our Father ; because there is no hope of obtaining the good things of grace unless we are adopted among his children. And from this paternity of God he concludes, whatever good is necessary to the pious shall be bestowed upon them by God; How much more shall your Father who is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Matth. vii. 11.—Let these things suffice concerning the fountain of grace, viz. God.³⁷³⁸

And from the Lord Jesus Christ.] The Apostle here points out the channel of grace, viz. Jesus Christ, the Mediator between God and men. God the Father himself is the fountain of grace; but he chooses that it should be derived to men through and for the sake of his Son: For as by the first Adam sin is derived to those who, after the flesh, are descended from him; so by the second Adam, viz. Christ, grace is derived to those who are spiritually regenerate. Therefore Christ is said to convey grace to. his people, either by the efficacy of his operation—or the benefit of his intercession the merit of his passion. As he is the Head of the Church, it is his peculiar office effectually to quicken his members, and to communicate grace, i. e. spiritual life and motion to them. Being a Priest, he prays and intercedes for this grace. Having offered himself a sacrifice acceptable to God, he meritoriously acquired the favour and grace of God for the ] Church. Hence it is that in the Holy Scriptures all grace and spiritual blessedness is set forth as given to us in Christ: as in Ephes. 1. 2, 4, Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ : according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: iv. 16, From whom the whole body fitly joiued together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of tise’f in love; John i. 16, For of his fulness have all we received and grace for grace.

The Lord.] Christ is designated by the relation which he bears to us; for he is Lord of us, and indeed of all creatures. And this title belongs not only to the divine nature, but also to his assumed nature: For God the Father would have all things to be subject unto him; and made him to sit above all powers, Ephes. 1. 20, 21, and Heb. ii. 8, He put all things under him. But he is the Lord of the godly, not only by right of Sonship, but also by right of redemption and deliverance.

Ye see whence grace flows to us, From God our Father, through our Lord Jesus Christ. Hence observe

1. They who are estranged from God through obstinate perseverance in sin, are destitute of quickening grace; and, if we speak of spiritual life, they are dead carcases, not men. For as a man who turns himself away from the sun, deprives himself of light and heat; so he who turns himself from God through sin, deprives himself of the influence of saving grace: for grace is from God. ;

2. They who are not adopted children, assuredly cannot either ask or expect any grace from God. In order therefore that we may approach the throne of grace with the assurance of faith, God must be intreated that He would send the Spirit of adoption into our hearts, whereby we may cry unto him, Abba, Father. For this grace is not simply from God, but from God the Father.

3. Let him who seeks grace implore neither the saints, nor even the blessed mother of Christ; but ask it from the Father in the name of Christ his Son: for that which the Son requires, who is the medium of grace, is easily obtained. Therefore the Papists err, who say that no grace comes from heaven to earth without passing through the hands of Mary.

4. Since Christ is our Lord, let us conduct ourselves as good and faithful servants. It is the duty of servants to frame their life and manners according to the will of their master; diligently to discharge the duty assigned them by their master; to form no friendships with the enemies of their master; if they err humbly to submit themselves to their master; and innumerable other things of the like nature; which, so long as we neglect, we deny that Christ is our master not by our lips, but by our lives.

And thus far we have unfolded the apostolic salutation. From the consideration of which arises an important controversy between us and the Papists, which we shall briefly touch upon. The Apostle, as you have heard, desires for the faithful grace and peace from God, and from the Lord Jesus Christ ; i. e. gratuitous acceptance for Christ’s sake, adoption among the children of God, and assurance of the remission of sins: Hence it is enquired Whether the faithful can or cannot assuredly determine with themselves that they are in favour with God, and that their sins are remitted them for Christ’s sake, in whom they have believed ?

Our opinion is that every faithful and truly justified man may, and ought, infallibly to believe,³⁹ that his sins are remitted to him as an individual, and that God is reconciled to him; i. e. that he hath this grace and peace, which the Apostle desired for the Colossians.

The opinion of the Papists is, That they who are truly justified and in favour with God, yet neither can nor ought to believe that they are reconciled to God and justified ; but to hope and conjecture only that they are in a state of grace, and have obtained remission.

We establish our opinion by these arguments :

1. From the nature of faith. He who is endued with true faith sees, by the very light of that faith kindled in . his heart through the Holy Spirit, that he believes in Christ, and is justified by faith: but he who sees this, at the same time is able to conclude that he is in favour with God, and that his sins are remitted him. For Scripture plainly states, Being justified by faith we have peace, Rom. v. 1. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life, John iii. 16 and 36. Therefore the whole difficulty lies in this, To shew that a believer is authorised to say, not from conjecture and opinion, but from conviction, I believe in Christ. This is proved from Augustine, De Trin. xiii. 1, That which we are commanded to believe we are not able to see; yet faith itself when it is wrought in us, we know to be in us. So Thomas, Whosoever hath knowledge or faith, is sure that he hath it ; because it is of the nature of faith, that a man should be certain of those things of which he hath faith To which purpose also Cajetan thus writes, By the certainty of faith any one knows that he hath the gift of faith infused into him, and he believes this, as he believes other things which he does believe, as for instance, the incarnation of Christ, &c. Durandus⁴⁰ . also writes, He that hath faith is as certain that he hath it, as he is certain of any thing else: For, believing, he experiences that he believes, Lib. iii. dist. 23. qu. 7. Thomas alleges this reason; Because every state of the intellect itself is the proximate cause of its own recognition, since its very essence exists in the mind.⁴¹ It may be confirmed by many testimomonies of Scripture, that the regenerate know that they are born again of the Spirit, and the faithful know themselves to be the faithful: Thus 1 Cor. xi. 12, We have received the Spirit which is of God, that we may know the things which are given us of God; 2 Cor. xiii. 5, Know ye not that Christ is in you except ye be reprobates? 1 John iv. 13, We know that we abide in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit. For faith, as light, not only makes other things, but itself visible.

2. From the nature of the promises. The promises of gospel grace and the remission of sins, through the reconciliation of Christ, are to be so believed by us as to afford firm and solid consolation: but unless I in particular believe that I am reconciled, and that I am absolved. from sins, they cannot yield this consolation. The former is evident, because the very end of gospel grace and of the divine promises is, that we may have strong consolation, Heb. vi. 18. But that general faith of the Papists, that every one who believes truly and lives piously, hath remission of sins; or that conditional faith, I, if I am faithful, am in the grace of God, does not yield strong consolation, because it may consist with despair. Jt is necessary, says . Bernard, to believe that you cannot have forgiveness, unless by the inercy* of God ; but at the same time believe this, that your own sins are forgiven you through him. Bernard, De annunt. Serm. 2. And the reason is because promises of God do not take effect until they have been accepted by us; although, therefore, remission of sins, upon condition of faith, be offered to all, yet it must of necessity be accepted by men individually and singly, that it may be useful and salutary to each one. Promises are not accepted by those who do not, but by those who do know, and understand, and feel, that they apprehend and accept them.

3. The Holy Spirit specially seals each particular believer, and makes him sure of his adoption, by a certain wonderful and secret testimony : for he is given to every believer as a pledge of divine love; and he, finally, pronounces in the hearts of the godly, that they are in favour with God : which testimony they both may and ought to believe. Therefore they do believe in particular that they are in the grace of God, and that their sins are remitted them. The authorities from which all this is proved are well known: Rom. viii. 16, The Spirit beareth witness with our spirits that we are the children of God; Gal. iv. 6, Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father; and Ephes. i. 13, 14, Ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit, after that ye believed, which is the earnest of your inheritance. Nor is this testimony fallacious or conjectural, but certain and infallible in all in whom it is found. For the word is the ministration of the Spirit, 2 Cor. iii.; and faith conceived by the ministration of the word, is always joined with the witness of the Spirit itself. Therefore the impression of faith by the Holy Spirit, in the heart of a particular man, is, as it were, a particular testimony that he is in grace, and that he is a child of God. So Bernard, Serm. 5, De dedicat. ecclesie, Who can tell whether he is worthy of love or hatred? Who hath known the mind of the Lord? Here it is necessary that faith should come to our aid ; that what is concealed. concerning us in the heart of the Father, may be revealed to us by his Spirit; and his Spirit bearing witness may persuade our spirits that we are the children of God. But he persuades by calling and justifying us freely through faith.

Bellarmin replies, that the Holy Spirit witnesses to our spirits only by some experience of an internal suavity and peace which produces nothing better than a conjectural certainty. De justif. lib. iii. cap. 9.

But Bernard rejects this jesuitical comment: for he says this testimony is received by the act of faith; and that the Holy Spirit persuades our spirit that we are the children of God, by faith, not by fallible conjectures. So Chrysostom in viii, ad Rom. When the Spirit testifies can any doubt remain ?

4. From the effects of faith. True believers have boldness, and access with confidence to God the Father by faith; Ephes. iii. 12, and Heb. x. 22. But he who continues doubting, and ignorant whether he be a child of God or not; whether he be in a state of enmity or reconciled; he cannot approach the throne of grace with this confidence; he cannot call God his Father, but with the greatest hesitation; much less can he confidently ask those things which are necessary for salvation from him, as from a Father.

Bellarmin rejoins, For enabling us to approach the throne of grace with confidence, it is not necessary that we be certain of our justification in particular ; a positive assurance from the Catholic faith, that Christ suffered for us, died, rose again, and intercedes with the Father, is sufficient. ;

But this reply is invalid; because although it may be a general truth that the death of Christ was sufficient for all; yet is it also true, that the fruit of the death, of the resurrection, and of the intercession of Christ, actually belong only to those who are implanted into Christ; that I should be sure, therefore, the benefits of Christ belong to me, it is necessary Í should be sure also, that I am become a member of Christ, i. e. am justified and reconciled . to God. For, if I doubt whether I am effectually called and justified, I must also doubt, whether I am without Christ, without God, an alien to the commonwealth of Israel, and a stranger to the covenants of promise, or not, Ephes. ii. 12. When all these things are left in doubt, what place is there for confidence ?

These are our arguments: several others we shall omit for the sake of brevity. Now let us proceed to

The arguments of the Papists.

Bellarmin, De justif. lib. iii. cap. 4, endeavours to prove the uncertainty of grace and of the remission of sins,

From the Scriptures.

1. From Prov. xx. 9, Who can say I have made my heart clean, I am pure from my sin? Although therefore some may be clean from sin, yet they themselves do not know it, neither have they an infallible testimony of their purity and righteousness.

I answer, that no one can say this: neither are any clean from indwelling sin, as Bellarmin fancies; but this does not forbid the assurance of the remission of sins and of a state of grace. For Paul acknowledges indwelling sin; and yet believes that he was freed from condemnation, and from the imputation thereof, Rom. vii. Therefore though his argument may be good with the Papists, who place their hope in works and inherent righteousness ; yet it is frivolous among the orthodox, who seek justification from faith and grace, not from the law and their own righteousness.

2. No man knoweth whether he is worthy of love or hatred, but all things are held doubtful as to the future. Eccl. ix. 1.

For the version I contend not with our adversaries, It is clear that Solomon spake of the judgment which is formed from external events; for he subjoins, because there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked, ver. 2. He does not therefore deny that the godly may be certain, through faith, of the favour of God, but by events. Which exposition Bernard approves, who says, that faith here comes to our help, and reveals to our hearts that we are the children of God, as we have before shewn.

3. Concerning propitiation be not without fear, to add sin unto sin: And say not His mercy is great ; he will be pacified for the multitude of my sins. Ecclesiasticus v. 5, 6. This place strangely galls the heretics.

Perhaps it does gall heretics, but it does not in the least affect the orthodox; for it leads to no conclusion against the assurance of remission. In the first place, because the passage may be understood of those who thought that their sins were taken away by the expiatory sacrifices, although they continued in the intention of sinning, and added sins to sins daily : such people as these who without true conversion of heart, thought their sins were expiated by victims, it does direct to be not without fear of their sin being propitiated, or (as it is in the original) of the propitiation of their sin. And this exposition those words following confirm, (ver. 7) Thou shalt not delay to turn to the Lord; for suddenly his wrath shall come forth, &c. But we may allow it to be understood concerning those whose sins, upon true repentance, have been remitted: They ought not to be without fear concerning propitiation and remission of sins ; for instance, adultery, theft, drunkenness, or any other: but that fear is, not lest the sin should not be remitted, but lest the same and greater imputation should return if it be again committed. or sins remitted return through ingratitude, not as it regards the act, but inasmuch as he who falls again is for his ingratitude rendered liable to much greater punishment than if his sin had not before been absolved. Durand. lib. iv. dist. 22. q. 1.

4. A fourth argument Bellarmin draws from those passages where justification and remission of sins is proposed under a condition. If the wicked man shall repent for all his sins, he shall live, Ezek. xviii. Ye shall be my friends if ye do what I command you, John xv.; and the like. But no one can be certain by the assurance of faith, that he is turned to the Lord with all his heart, and hath true faith and penitence such as is required ; since no where in Scripture is a testimony of this kind found concerning our faith and penitence in particular.

I answer; To receive the grace of remission, the condi- . tion of faith and true penitence is necesssry on our part; but what he adds, That no one knows whether his faith and repentance be such and so great as is required by God, is most false. For justification does not depend on the degree or measure of faith or penitence, but upon the genuineness: And every man who hath received faith and repentance by the gift of the Spirit, has experienced that his faith and penitence are true, and not hypocritical, as was before shewn. Whence that saying of Augustine in Ps. cxlix. There is a mode of glorying in the consciousness that you have ascertained your faith to be sincere, your hope certain, and your love without dissimulation. As to his plea, that a testimony concerning our faith, or our remission in particular, is not found in Scripture, we will explain it when we come to the reasonings of Bellarmin; for there this will recur.

5. He endeavours to find a fifth testimony from those passages where remission is proposed to the penitent under the form of a doubt: Joel ii. 12, 14, Turn unto me with all your heart. Who knows if God will return and repent? And Acts viii. 22 (in reference to Simon Magus), Repent, if perhaps the thought of thy heart may be forgiven thee. These, and like passages, says Bellarmin, signify an uncertainty of remission, not in respect of the divine promise, but in respect of our disposition.

To the first testimony another Jesuit shall answer this Jesuit. Thus then Ribera⁴² upon this passage, Who knows if God will return and repent? says, That is, perhaps he will not suffer the Chaldeans to come into your land, nor that ye shall be led captives, if ye will repent. The prophet, then, does not direct them to doubt of the remission of their sins if they turn, nor does he command the truly penitent to doubt the fact of their penitence; but he shews that he himself is not certain concerning the removal of external judgments, although they turn: respecting this, therefore, they might hope, concerning the other they might be certain. Moreover, he shews from Ambrose, that this phrase is not always expressive of doubt; and from Gregory, that it sometimes indicates the difficulty of a thing, and the scarcity of instances in which it has been done.

To the second likewise Ribera answers; That Peter had no doubt of his sin being remitted, on his repentance ; but he doubted if the penitence of Simon would be real. That may be also added which Tremellius has observed: This is not the phrase of one who doubts, but of one rising above his doubts and difficulties.

6. He, lastly, brings forward those passages which recommend diffidence to the godly and faithful themselves ; as, Happy is the man that feareth always, Prov. xxviii. 14. Work out your salvation with fear and trembling, Phil. ii. 12. Therefore we ought not confidently to believe (says he) the remission of our sins.

I answer; Filial fear does not exclude certainty concerning reconciliation and the remission of sins; on the contrary, it is necessary that he who believes that he is reconciled to God, should so much the more fear, lest by giving the rein to his lusts he should fall into fresh guilt. These _ quotations do not direct us to be doubtful about the remission of sins, but to be careful and fearful of offending God.—And so much concerning the testimonies that are brought from the Scriptures.

Those which he has brought from the Fathers are of no value; for they prove only this, that although a man may not be conscious to himself of any sin, yet this affords no certainty of his being free from sin; which we readily ] confess. But it is one thing to be absolved from sin, and quite another to be free from sin.

But let us come to the reasonings of Bellarmin, which he promises us shall be no common ones :⁴³. :

1. Nothing can be sure by the certainty of faith, unless it be either directly contained in the word of God, or, by evident consequence, may be deduced from the word of God: but that such, or such a man, hath his sins remitted him, is not contained in the word, nor evidently deduced from it; therefore it is not sure with the certainty of faith. The Minor is proved by the word of God testifying only in general that sins are remitted to the faithful and penitent : but that Peter or John may believe or may repent, is not revealed in the word, nor can it be correctly inferred from it; because there is no other inference than this, The word of God testifies, that they who truly believe and are converted obtain remission of sius: I am sure that [ am a true believer and penitent; therefore I have obtained remission of my sins. The Minor, says Bellarmin, is not only false, but also impossible without a special revelation.

Answer. Before I come to the Minor, I will premise a few words in explanation of the Major. What Bellarmin says, That nothing can be sure with the certainty of faith, unless it be propounded or deduced from Scripture, must be understood concerning the doctrine of faith which we believe, not concerning the habit or act of faith by which we believe. For example: That God is three in one is a doctrine of faith; of this therefore we are sure because it is thus written in our Bible; but my believing in the Trinity in Unity, is an act of my faith, the certainty of which is not written in the Scriptures, but on the tablets of my heart. Certainty of the former respects the whole Church ; therefore it is revealed in Scripture, which lies open to the whole Church : but the certainty of the latter, that is to say, of the habit or act of faith dwelling in the heart of this or that man, respects him alone, and is therefore discovered to him alone by a reflex act of the mind itself, and still more clearly by the internal operation of the Holy Spirit, who, together with faith and grace, gives a consciousness of that faith and grace being received, as we have before proved. Here we may adduce Scotus, who, 3 dist. 23, says, Like as I believe that God is three in person and one in essence; so also I believe, that I have faith infused, by which I believe this.⁴⁴

Another observation must be added which also pertains to the Major; viz. that every conclusion is of faith which is drawn from one proposition contained in Scripture, and another following by fair consequence; whether it be known by sense, or by reason, or in any other mode. This Gerson teaches, De vita spirit; and Medina.

Now I come to the Minor; and I deny that it may not be maintained by evident inference from the word that this or that believer hath his sins remitted. For Scripture speaks to individuals; Rom. x. 9, If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

But Bellarmin urges that the Minor proposition is as yet wanting, viz. I confess, and I believe: therefore the conclusion, I shall be saved, cannot be derived from faith.

I answer, as above, that this Minor does not respect any general doctrine of faith, but the particular act of the believer: it must not therefore be sought in our Bibles, but in our hearts. But now if by any spiritual perception, or certain experience, or, lastly, by the testimony of the Holy Spirit, or by all these, the Minor proposition be established, the conclusion will be of faith, because the Major proposition was of faith. And we have before proved from . the Fathers, from the Schoolmen, and from the Scriptures, that believers have a clear knowledge of their faith and reconciliation : the same things therefore we shall not again repeat.

Still our adversary urges ; We see many to be really deceived, thinking they have faith and grace when they have not. For many heretics boast the assurance of faith ; many also think, though notrenewed, that they have obtained faith, and the remission of their sins from God: therefore they have not this certainty of which they make such a parade.

I answer; all this is nothing to the point. For we do not maintain that every man who dreams that he has faith, grace, and the remission of sins, is really possessed of these gifts; but that every one who is indeed possessed of them, knows also that he truly believes, and is in favour with God, &c. The Jesuit concludes affirmatively from the Major to the Minor, in this manner: An heretic and carnal man is deceived, in judging concerning faith and grace ; therefore the truly faithful and renewed man may also be deceived. Like as a man is deceived, who in a dream thinks not that delusions but realities are presented to his mind, yet it follows not from thence that he is, or can be deceived, when he is satisfied that he is not asleep, but sees the things placed before his eyes: so the heretic and carnal man, dreaming about faith and grace, is deceived, fancying that he possesses the realities; but the truly renewed man beholds these things presented as it were to his mental eyes, in the watchfulness of open truth, not in the vision of dreaming vanity ; he therefore cannot be deceived. Atlasthe asks, By what mark shall we prove that we are not deceived, and that others are? Foolish question! By what sign will you prove to one sleeping, that he is not awake, but that you are? By the experimental certainty of watchfulness itself, which hath a clearer and stronger perception, I do not think, but I know that I am awake: the dreamer thinks the same, but he is deceived. So by a certain experimental proof the faithful know that they have faith; yet they are not able to prove this to others, who do not perceive the internal emotions of their hearts : Neither can they persuade those dreamers that they have not faith, because indeed they adhere, if not more confidently, yet more pertinaciously to false notions than to true ones.⁴⁵

2. This article of faith, I believe that my sins are remitted me, is laid down in no summary of faith; therefore it is not proper to believe it.

The conclusion is utterly invalid; however I shall not stop to repel it; but I answer, that the article is laid down in all creeds. First, by evident consequence. For when I say, I believe in God, (as Augustine, and after him all the Schoolmen have it), I say not only that I believe that there is a God, or that I believe his words; but that I myself love him, and through believing in God go to him, and am incorporated among his members. For all these things are implied in the words, I believe in God. Compend. theol. 5. 21. Secondly, it is laid down expressly by that article, I believe in the forgiveness of sins. For that which Bellarmin pretends is not the sense, I believe that remission of sins is given in the Church; which the devil and any reprobate may believe: but I believe remission of sins to be given me through Christ, because I believe in him. This Aquinas himself seems to grant, De justif. art. 4, where he says, In the justification of a sinner, it is not necessary that all the articles of faith be in actual contemplation at the time, but only that God be contemplated as justifying and remitting sins; in which the other articles are implicitly included. In quest. disp. in respon. ad 9mo. Here I ask, To whom is God regarded as forgiving sins? Is it to any undefined individual, or to the justified person himself ? Beyond doubt, to that man himself, who is then meditating on the remission of his sins.

But again he objects, If we are bound to believe the remission of our sins, then whoever does not believe this is an heretic: but he neither can nor ought to believe this, who offends wilfully and remains in mortal sin: therefore every such sinner is an heretic ; which is contrary to rea- ] son.

Bellarmin is deceived in two points: First, in this, that he determines him to be an heretic who does not believe whatsoever he ought to believe: for not the defect of faith, whether of act or of habit, constitutes an heretic, but a pertinacious opposition to the doctrine of faith. For, if every one be an heretic who does not believe the mysteries of the Christian faith, all Gentiles would be heretics ; even all Christians who are not renewed would be heretics : for no one believes any article of faith by scriptural and infused faith, before he has received the gift of faith in regeneration. Secondly, that is not by any means sound, which he says, That a wilful sinner is not bound to believe the remission of his sins. For he is bound to surrender his will; he is bound to repent, and also to believe God, who promises remission to the penitent. We say not, therefore,

NONE. E That he, voluntarily remaining in grievous sins, can believe that sins are remitted him, or ought in his present condition so to do: but we say, that he, by the help of God, may, and is in duty bound to come out of that state, and to believe this.

3. It is not expedient that men should have certainty concerning the remission of their sins and special grace; for he who is confident that he is justified, easily becomes proud as a Pharisee.

I answer, He who is confident that he is justified by inherent righteousness and his own works, is easily puffed up: but he who believes that he is justified freely, thenceforward glories in God, in himself is abased: For, what hath he which he hath not received ?

4. God hath revealed the remission of their sins to some by special favour, as Authors testify concerning St. Anthony and St. Francis. But why should he reveal that to certain persons by special grant, if the assurance of it be common to all the faithful ?

The credit of these narrations rests with the authors. But I answer; There is nothing to prevent that which is believed through faith, from being more distinctly and evidently shewn by special revelation, if such be God’s will. Paul believed through faith the bliss of the future state ; yet God was pleased to communicate to him in a trance a brighter vision of the celestial happiness. So, although they believed the remission of their sins, yet God would impart to them a more manifest assurance of it.

5. The most perfect and holy men have trembled and doubted concerning their state and the remission of their sins: how therefore is an assurance of special grace and remission set before all believers ?

Answer. We do not maintain that true believers never doubt either the remission of their sins, or the state of their reconciliation with God ; but we contend that these doubts arise from the flesh, not from faith. This, therefore, is the difference between us and the Papists: They commend doubt in the faithful themselves, and attribute it to the virtue of humility; we recognise it as sin, and say that it is a remnant of sin: they leave a believer in perpetual doubt; we say that he at length breaks through it, and is convinced by faith that his sins are remitted, not by conjecture, or hope only, into which, as the Papists suppose, deception may enter. But that, whilst we are in this frail body, faith may abide in a man who is subject to frequent doubts, is evident from Matth. xiv. 31, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt ?—This the Schoolmen also grant. In a believer, an idea may spring up in opposition to that which he most firmly holds, Aquinas, De fide, art. 1. And in another place, The certainty of faith implies the stedfastness of adhesion, not the quiescence of the intellect. So Durandus, Lib. iii. dist. 23, qu. 7, Faith may be subjected to some degree of doubt, and yet be sound.

It is not, therefore, necessary, that the assurance of faith : exclude all doubts, but that it prevail.

And these are Bellarmin’s extraordinary conclusives, with which he opposes the assurance of faith, conceding in the mean time the assurance of hope to the faithful ; concerning which distinction I shall also add a few remarks, and conclude.

I ask of the Papists, then, whether they mean human hope, i. e. hope arising from probable conjectures and the . deduction of human reason ; or divine and scriptural hope, 1. e. a virtue inspired by the Holy Spirit. If they say that the godly are assured of grace and the remission of sins by human hope, they allow nothing more to the godly, than what the unbeliever may have; if by inspired hope, let them hear their own friend Durandus,⁴⁶ Lib. 3: That which depends upon inspired hope cannot but come to pass. Scripture also assigns the same certainty to this hope as to faith. Rom. viii. 24, We are saved by hope; and xv. 13, The God of hope fill you with all joy. and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost. Faith, therefore, is the eye of this hope; and this hope is excited and established by the Holy Spirit, whose gift it is: unless, therefore, faith be blind, and the Holy Spirit excite to false persuasion, there will be the same certainty in inspired hope as in faith. For inspired hope not only comprehends that pleasing expectation of future good, which lies in the will; but the undoubted assurance of obtaining those things which subsist in the realising and selfappropriating act of the mind; so also faith: as Parisiensis, De mor. cap. 3, rightly observes.

Finally, I add the confession of adversaries: of Catharinus,⁴⁷ who in the Council of Trent, maintained that the faithful have the assurance of divine faith as to their own grace and justification: of the Divines of Cologne, who write in Enchirid. Christ. institut.⁴⁸ That it is necessary for justification that every one should assuredly believe that his sins are remitted him :.of Bellarmin himself; who is forced to confess that the hope of Christians should be most sure, as well on the part of the will as of the understanding ; and that by reason of a peculiar disposition only, it is accompanied by any fear. But we have before shewn that these fears and doubts do not take away assurance, but oppose it, and at length are put to flight by faith resisting, and cleaving to the divine promises.

We conclude, therefore, that every true believer hath, and believes that he hath that grace and peace of God which ‘ Paul wishes for the Colossians. E

Verses 3, 4.

We have dismissed the inscription or title to this Epistle. Now follows a preface or exordium, adapted to conciliate their good will; which is the second portion of this chapter, and extends from this third verse to the twelfth. Its parts are three, 1. A congratulatory proposition, in verse 3d. 2. The causes of this congratulation narrated and illustrated, from the 3d to the 9th. 3. A solemn prayer for the increase of all spiritual good things, from the 9th verse to the 12th. :

1. The congratulatory proposition; We give thanks to God, and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, &c.

We givethanks.] The persons congratulating are denoted in this first word, and also the mode of congratulation.

The persons who rejoice and congratulate, on account of the faith and love of the Colossians, are Paul and Timotheus, preachers of the Gospel. Whence it appears how godly ministers are affected towards the people of God ; viz. that they rejoice not so much because they receive temporal fruit from their flock, as that the flock of Christ reap spiritual fruit from their preaching. This is a mark of true love and pastoral affection, that he rejoices in their good as much as in his own; especially in their spiritual good.

The mode of congratulation, and of expressing apostolic joy is by giving thanks, ’Euxagiordyuex, To give thanks, is to declare oneself grateful for a kindness received, by acknowledging it, and by proclaiming the author of it. For in this the apostolic congratulation differs from civil or ordinary congratulations: in the latter, we are wont to celebrate the fortune, or the industry, or the prudence of those to whom, because some great good has happened, we are glad; but the congratulations of the Apostles are nothing else than simple renderings of thanks, in which they celebrate the benignity of Him who bestows spiritual gifts on men. Now who that is, is declared ;

To God and the Father of our Lord, &c.] Here the person is described to whom thanks are presented by the Apostle. And he is described as well by his absolute name, that it is God; as by his relative title, that it is the Father of Christ. The Apostle employs both with the best design.

In the first place, he gives thanks to God because He is the Giver of all good: but although he designates the first person in the Trinity, yet he does not exclude the rest. For the works of the Trinity, as it respects things external, are undivided. Therefore what God the Father gives to the creature, the same the Son gives, and the Holy Spirit. But because the first person is the fountain of Deity, therefore the rest are understood where he is named.

Observe, 1. From the apostolic example, we here learn, in all our joy for good things bestowed either upon ourselves or others, that the recollection of God ought instantly to occur to us; because whatever is joyful and salutary comes of his beneficence.

2. We are admonished of this, that it behoves us, as often as we observe any one adorned with remarkable gifts . from God, to break out into the praises of God and to giving of thanks: for God will have this payment of praises and thanks to be rendered to him, by all those who hold his benefits, as a recognition of his supreme dominion. So the Psalmist, cxvi. 12, 13, says, What shall I render unto the Lord for all his benefits towards me? I will take the cup of salvation, and will call upon the name of the Lord. Every man is bound in the debt of honour (as the Schoolmen say), to render something to that person who has done him a favour. But God needs not our good things; we should therefore render to him what is his own, 1. e. the glory of his benefits. If we are unwilling to do this, as he who does not acknowledge his feudal lord, by this crime of ingratitude loses his copyhold; so he who does not acknowledge God, the Author of his good, may in justice be deprived of that good.

And the Father of our Lord, &c. These words are not so to be understood, as though God were one, and the Father of Christ another ; but are to be explained in this manner; to God and the Father of Christ, i.e. to God, which God is also the Father of Christ: or so, We give thanks to God and the Father of Christ, i. e. to Him who is both the God of Christ, and at the same time also the Father of Christ.

He is called the God of Christ in regard of his human nature. For the human nature of Christ, like other creatures, hath God for Creator and Preserver; whence Christ hanging upon the cross, cried to the Father, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Matth. xxvii. 46: and in John xx. 17, said, I ascend to my God and your God.

But he is called the Father of Christ also in respect of each of his natures. For the Father by an eternal and ineffable generation hath communicated to his Son his Divine essence. I say by an eternal generation: because we must not think in divine things that God the Father is prior to his Son, as among creatures the father always is. Well spake Damascenus,⁴⁹ “Ez? uiv dw rns vow “Tyov yerioews doeBes AÉYyEIY xpovov wecievoat: with respect then to the generation of the Son it is impious to say that there was interval of time. For the Son is not brought into existence from a state of non-existence, but always was with the Father, and in him from all eternity, and without beginning begotten by him. Whence John xvii. 5, the Son says to the Father, Glorify me with that glory which I had with thee before the world was. But concerning the Divine nature of Christ, we must speak more largely hereafter. In respect also of the human nature, Christ, by special privilege, is called the Son of God; and God, the Father of Christ: Luke i. 32, the Son of the Highest: Luke xxii. 46, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: John x. 36; and in many other passages.

But it may be asked, Why, in this place, it was not sufficient for the Apostle to say, We give thanks to God, but he should also add, and to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ ?

I answer, first, he adds this for our consolation: for in the verse preceding he had called God our Father ; in this he calls the same God the Father of Christ. He intimates, therefore, that we and Christ are brethren ; and thence that our true Brother always intercedes with God the common Father, for his brethren; and that is easily obtained from the Father which the Son requests; especially when he requests any thing for his brethren, not for strangers, Heb. ell.

Secondly, to distinguish Christian invocation, from the . invocation of Heathens and Jews. For an Heathen invokes and praises God Almighty, who made the heaven and the earth; a Jew invokes the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob; but Christians alone invoke and acknowledge God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Lastly, that he might shew that the benefits of God the Father are derived to us through his Son and our Brother Jesus Christ. For unless God were the Father of Christ, and of us through Christ, we should have no hope of obtaining the benefits of God.

Praying always for you.] The Apostle here shews for whom he gives thanks, viz. for the Colossians; and when, praying always, i.e. always when we do pray.

Observe 1. In that the Apostle gives so frequent, so regular thanks to God for benefits conferred upon others, he shews the nature of Christian love, which rejoices with them that do rejoice, weeps with them that weep, and finally reekons the happiness and misery of its friends as its own. Parisiensis well terms love the most trustworthy and innocent of thieves, because it makes all the goods of its neighbour its own, and yet takes away nothing from him. Nay out of another’s good things it finds a gift which it may present truly acceptable to God, viz. the praising of God and giving of thanks.

2. The Apostle by his conduct reproves the envy and jealousy of this age: in which, so far from men being willing to give thanks to God for the distinguished and excellent gifts of others, they are rather ready to turn the same to evil, and revile them with malevolent detractions. From which this disadvantage always happens, that they who, by rejoicing in the prosperity of others, would have found their own benefit, by envying it do but torment themselves: for set aside envy, and what I have is thine; set aside envy, and what thou hast is mine, as says Augustine in Psal. cxxxix.

Praying always.) 1 join these [two words], because they were not always in the act of giving thanks; but they always gave thanks then when they prayed. Therefore the latter word is a limitation of the former; and it is customary among the Greeks to explain a participle by the subjunctive.

Observe l. The time of praying is therefore the most convenient time for rendering thanks to God; for prayer is the elevation of the mind to God; and then especially thanks are to be given to God when the mind glows with pious affections. For thanks are accounted dry and sterile before God, which proceed only from the outward lips; they must be drawn from the bottom of the heart, which, becoming fervid by prayer, is fain to celebrate the glory and the praises of God, not for form’s sake, but seriously.

2. Hence also, we gather this, that the giving of thanks for benefits received, is the most suitable introduction to petition for new benefits, whether for ourselves or for others. For this is Paul’s method: he gives thanks to God for the good bestowed on the Colossians; then he desires from God a confirmation of those gifts; as ye shall hereafter hear.

And so far concerning the congratulatory proposition. The narration and the illustration of the cause of this giving of thanks follows; the narration in the 4th verse; for there he names those good things which had excited him to give thanks to God, viz. their faith and love. The illustration follows to the 9th verse.

Ver. 4.

In this fourth verse, the Apostle explains (as I have said) the cause of his joy and congratulation: and he does it by the enumeration of certain spiritual gifts which were conspicuous among the Colossians. Here he specifies two; viz. faith and love: and each gift he illustrates by annexing, not its adequate, but its primary and principal object; faith in Christ, love towards the saints.

Your faith.] By faith here he means the profession of the Christian religion, which the Colossians had embraced, through the ministry and preaching of Epaphras and others ; not indeed the external profession of faith alone, : but an internal and sincere faith dwelling in the heart: for by the rule of charity, the latter is always to be presumed in the former, unless hypocrisy and impiety be discovered to evince the contrary.

He places this faith in the foreground, and puts it before other spiritual gifts, because it is in its nature prior to the rest. For it is the foundation and root of godliness and religion; itis the gate of life, through which God first enters into the human mind; it is the basis of the spiritual building. For as in the creation light preceded the other creatures; for God said, Let there be light, and there was light on the first day: so in the work of regeneration, God says, Let there be the light of faith, and it first shines in the mind, then other virtues follow. The very first approach to God is made through faith, Heb. xi. 6. The first purification of the human heart is effected by faith, Acts xv. 9. That our works may be pleasing to God, faith is in the first place required, Heb. xi. Whence Prosper, De vita contemplat. iii. 21, excellently writes, that faith is the foundation of righteousness, which no good works precede, but from which all proceed: it purges us from all sins, illuminates our minds, reconciles to God, &c.⁵⁰

Hence it appears, whatever is done by unbelieving men, however holy and pious it may seem, is yet the dead carcase and image of a good work, not a good work, nor to be recompensed by any reward which is promised to true godliness.

We will adduce a few testimonies of the Fathers, because the Papists, who decry faith upon all occasions, and extol works, ascribe a certain merit to these works of unbelievers.

1. Clemens Alexandrinus,⁵¹ Strom. 1. says, When life is ended it will be of no avail to men to have done rightly now, unless [in conjunction with all this laudable morality] they have faith. Augustine says, Whosoever hath not a right faith towards God, with all his laudable deeds, departs from this life tinto condemnation, lib. iii. contra duas epis. Pelag. cap. 5. All the life of the unbelieving is sin: Prosper, Sent. 106. When the acknowledgment of God is wanting, all righteousness is like the human body without a head, Lactantius, vi. 9.—I bring forward no more: these sufficiently shew why the Apostle in the first place gives thanks to God for the faith of the Colossians, viz. because without faith nothing can be grateful and acceptable to God.⁵²

So much concerning the first gift.

In Christ Jesus.] The Apostle shews the object of Christian faith; not the general, or adequate object, but the principal; and, if we regard the act of justification, the peculiar object.

The general and adequate object of faith is, all the truth revealed by God in the Holy Scriptures. “There is a sort of general faith which answers to this description, and which by a sure persuasion resolves that whatever things are made manifest in the word of God, are most true. But this general assent of faith cannot justify ; because justification brings with it peace of conscience, purification of heart, free access to God, and many other privileges, of which, doubtless, any one may be void, nothwithstanding his firmly believing the whole Scripture to be true and in- . spired by God: For the devil himself knows the Scriptures, and acknowledges them to have proceeded from the Author of truth. Therefore in this general object of faith, viz. the word of God, there is one special and main object which is principally to be considered by a believer, and to which all other things that are delivered in the Scriptures have a certain relation and reference, as Durandus speaks, in Prolog. Sent. And this object is, Christ Jesus in the character of a Mediator and Saviour, which is intimated under his very names ; for Christ Jesus means nothing else than—anointed Saviour.

Now it is clear from the Scriptures that he is the principal object of faith, and that all other things which are delivered in the Scriptures regard Christ as their end and aim. John v.39, Search the Scriptures, they testify of me; and a little after, Moses wrote of me. So in Luke, ult. ver. 44, All things must be fulfilled which are written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms concerning me, So it is affirmed concerning the whole law, that it was a Schoolmaster to bring us to Christ. Him the prophets described; Him the ceremonies of the law shadowed forth; Him, in short, with all his benefits, the Gospel offers and exhibits to us. The Apostle, therefore, has rightly placed, as the special and principal object of faith, not the Word of God in general, but Christ Jesus our Saviour and Mediator, who is principally regarded by a believer, and to whom all things in Scripture have reference.

Now from hence it follows, that the proper and principal act of justifying faith, is the apprehension and particular application of the gratuitous promises which are offered to believers in this Mediator, Christ. Which particular and justifying faith includes general faith ; for if it should waver in general concerning the truth of the divine word, it could not confide in particular concerning the promises made to us in Christ the Mediator ; but it justifies, not so far as it assents in general to the divine word, but so far as it is applied to this its principal and peculiar object, viz. to the promises of grace in the Mediator.

Which is evident, first, because as Thomas expresses it, 1 quest. 45, art. 6, the justification of a sinner pertains to the goodness and the mercy of God superabundantly diffusing itself. But we neither can, nor ought, to seek or apprehend the goodness and mercy of God, independently of the promises of grace, which are made and ratified to us in Christ the Mediator: therefore in these alone, as in the proper object, the act of justifying faith is exercised, when and as far as it justifies.

Secondly, it is evident from the distribution of the Scripture; for it is divided into the Law and the Gospel : but justification is not sought or contained in the doctrine of the Law. Not in that part which prescribes obedience and promises a recompence to those fulfilling its commands; because the conscience of every one witnesses, that we cannot be justified by the legal covenant. Much less in that other part which contains the threats and punishments due to those who violate the law ; because this doctrine affords not the hope of salvation, but inspires the dread of hell. It remains, therefore, that justification be sought in the Gospel, i, e. in the promises of grace; and the act of faith, as far as it justifies, should be especially directed to these promises.

Thirdly, we shew this from clear testimonies of Scrip- i. ture. Acts xiii. 38, 39, Through Christ is preached the forgiveness of sins ; aid by him all that believe are justified from all things from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses, And Rom. iii. 21, 22, But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe.

I argue these points the more at large, because Bellarmin, De justif. lib. i. cap. 8, &c. says, that justifying faith is a general assent to all things which are contained in the word of God; and makes, not the promises of grace, but the whole revelation of God, the object of this faith. If he intends, that justifying faith assents to the whole divine word, we willingly concede it: but if he denies that it has a certain principal object in the word which it regards before all others in the act itself of justifying, viz. Christ ^. the Mediator, and his gratuitous promises concerning the remission of sins, he is opposed to St. Paul, who, in a hundred places, names Christ as the principal object of faith, not the word in general: he also opposes even Aquinas, who says, that faith in the act of justifying does not even regard and contemplate all the articles of faith alike, much less the whole word of God, but only God as remitting sins.—But here a doubt which is raised by the Schoolmen may be briefly solved.

They ask, How Christ can be the object of faith, when faith has for its object an enunciation or proposition revealed by God? Christ is a thing, and (as the Logicians say) an incomplex term, not a proposition in which truth or falsehood is perceived.

It is answered, That is called an object of faith which is either believed itself, or concerning which any thing is believed. The thing itself which is believed is a proposition or enunciation; that concerning which it is believed is a thing signified by a simple term, as Durandus says. Aquinas more plainly remarks ; The object of faith is regarded in a twofold manner: either on the part of the thing believed ; and so the object of faith is always something incomplex, viz. the thing itself concerning which the propositions of faith are formed, as Christ, the resurrection, the final judgment, creation, and the like: or on the part of the person believing ; and so the object of faith is that enunciation which faith apprehends concerning the thing, as that Christ is the Mediator and Saviour, that our bodies shall rise again, and that Christ will come to judge the world, that God created the world, and the like.—Thus far concerning the first gift, i. e. faith, and its object, viz. Christ.

And love to all the saints.] This is that other gift, from which the Apostle has taken occasion to give thanks to God in the name of the Colossians; and to which also is joined a certain special object of this virtue, viz. the saints.

Respecting this gift itself we must first enquire what it is. Lombard⁵³ thought (lib. i. dist. 4), that love was nothing else than the Holy Spirit himself immediately moving the will to the act of love. For he put this difference between love and the other virtues, that the Holy Spirit moved the soul to acts of other virtues, by the intermediate infusion of certain habits, but to the act of love immediately by himself, without any other habit being created or infused. And he grounded this opinion especially upon that passage of John, 1 Epis. iv. 8, God is love; and again in vers. 16, God is love, and he that dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, and God in him. But this opinion can by no means be supported : for as faith and hope are created gifts, so also love is a habit created by God, by which the will is inclined to love God above all things for his own sake, and all other persons for the sake of God. For if the act of love were an immediate motion of the will by God, without a habit infused, it would follow, First, that the act of love would not be voluntary, because it proceeds neither from the will naturally (for love is above nature), nor from the will as perfected by supernatural habit; but only from the will as it is moved as the instrument of a superior cause ; just as the hand or the foot may be moved by something else. Secondly, it would follow, that man ! would not have any promptitude in love, or delight in the exercise of love: for promptitude and delight in actions, argue a habit either acquired or infused.

The Scripture itself also opposes this comment of Lombard, and clearly teaches that ’aydéan, or our love, is not the Holy Spirit, but a fruit of the Holy Spirit, Gal. v. 22. The Fathers also testify against it. ‘Ayagn ‘tecí didSeorg Luyns “aya, it is a disposition of the mind by which it is made to prefer nothing to God, Maxim 1. centur. sentent. tom. 7. And Prosper; Love is a rectified will turned from all earthly things, and inseparably united to God, kindled by a certain Sire of the Holy Spirit ; De vita contemp. iii. 13. He says that love is inspired by the Holy Spirit, not the Holy Spirit himself. To the passage cited from John, God is love, the answer is easy ; For God is called love causally, not formally (as the Schoolmen say), i. e. inasmuch as he causes love in us ; for he is the eternal fountain whence our love, and all other virtues, flow to us. Or God may be called love essentially, in the same manner as God is said to be wisdom, and justice; because these attributes are not accidents in God, but one and the same essence with God. But this does not in the least prevent the possibility of our love being a created gift; as our prudence, and righteousness, and holiness are created gifts, although God may be rightly called prudence itself, and righteousness itself, and holiness itself.⁵⁴

We see what love is. Now, in the second place, since it is connected by the Apostle with faith, let us enquire concerning the connexion of faith and love, viz. Whether true faith can exist without love?

First, we grant that the mind of man can be so enlightened as to believe God, i. e. to assent to the divine word in general, and yet at the same time, be destitute of love. The Schoolmen call this fides informis ;⁵⁵ we, historical faith, or general faith, So the very ancient Schoo’man of Altissiodorum, lib. 3, We believe God by informal faith, i. e. that God is, and that God is Almighty, and many other things. Concerning this also James speaks, Chr. ii. 14, What doth it profit though any one say he hath faith, but hath not works? Then a little after, The devils believe and tremble.

But there is also another faith, which we call justifying faith, the Schoolmen fides formata,⁵⁶ which not only believes God, but in God, i.e. which apprehends God as appeased and reconciled in Christ; and this we say is never separated from love. The former is a simple irradiation, not a theological virtue; this latter is the first among these three celebrated theological virtues.⁵⁷ And the perpetual connection of this with love is proved by many reasons :

1. Because this faith apprehends God as good and merciful, and the Author of salvation to a man’s self through Christ; and this apprehension produces necessarily the love of God: For so Altissiodorensis, The estimation with which any one regards God through faith to be his chief good, engenders the desire of that good; lib. 3.

2. Because justifying faith sanctifies and purifies the heart; but a heart void of love is not sanctified or purified.

3. Because every one who believes with true and justifying faith, has a right to eternal life: For so the Baptist, . He who believes in the Son hath eternal life. And Paul to the Galatians, Ye are all the children of God by faith. But these things are united in no one who is void of love.

4. The Schoolmen themselves shew that these three theological virtues are always joined. So Altissiodorensis ; All the virtues are united: for faith is the necessary cause of hope and love, lib. 3. But concerning the connection of faith and love in the very act of believing, thus Parisiensis ; writes; Living faith is not only a light to shew the things believed ; but a life exciting us to do or to decline those things, to seek or avoid them. And Durandus, To believe in God is not simply an act of faith, but the act of faith and love together.⁵⁸

From these considerations it is manifest, when the Papists argue that true faith may be separated from love, they are either playing upon words, or opposing their own Schoolmen. For that faith which is void of love, differs in kind from that which is justifying; for the last is a theological virtue, the other is not: they differ in the object; fer this apprehends God reconciled to us in Christ ; that is not able to apprehend any such thing : they differ also in their effects; fer this brings peace to the conscience, that fear: they differ, lastly, in their acts ; for the act of this is to believe in God, the act of the other is only to believe God, as we have before shewn.

The last question, which has respect to faith and love, remains ; viz. Whether love be so conjoined with faith that it is the form of faith? So it appeared to Thomas, to Durandus, and to others of a more recent date. For they imagine faith by itself to be a certain dead and inanimate thing, and whatever it hath of life or merit, to be borrowed from love as from its soul and form.

But on the other hand, Altissiodorensis (whom I have often named)⁵⁹ opposes this, lib. 3, where he maintains, that true and formed faith naturally precedes love; and he adduces the following reasons:

1. The just lives by faith; therefore he loves by faith; therefore living faith is prior in its nature to love, and hence it is not formed and enlivened by love.

2. From 1 Tim. i. 5, The end of the commandment is love out of a pure heart, and of faith unfeigned: therefore true faith, and that which purifies the heart, produces love ; and by consequence it is not formed from love.

3. The motion of true faith precedes the motion of love; therefore the habit itself of true faith naturally precedes the habit of love. For we believe and repose our faith on God before we are able to love him.

4. From the Apostle to the Galatians v. 6, In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh by love: therefore faith is the efficient cause of love, and hence love is not the form of faith, but its daughter or handmaid.

But when they (the Papists) are driven to straits, they endeavour to explain their opinion in this way : That love is the form of faith, not in such manner as in natural things, a form is said to give the shape to material; but only in this respect, that by love the act of faith is perfected: for faith hath its entire efficacy and merit from love. Thus Aquinas, Q. 2. quest. 4, art. 3. and qu. disp. de fide, art. 5. And Durandus, lib. 3. dist. 33. quest. 8, Love is not the inherent, but extrinsic form of faith; neither does it become a form of faith as being of its nature, but as far as it is meritorious.*

But all these things are fallacious and weak. For, first, love does not elicit nor perfect the proper act of faith; because although they are simultaneous, yet naturally the act and even the habit of faith precedes the act and habit ! of love.

Secondly, love does not, as they think, render the act of faith meritorious, or acceptable to God: but on the contrary, the power of meriting (as they speak) i. e. of rendering our actions acceptable, is placed more especially in faith than in love. For without faith it is impossible that the act of loving can be acceptable to God. Also the regenerate man renounces his own understanding through faith, before he does his own will through love. Love therefore is not the form, but the offspring of true faith.

Hitherto we have considered the gift itself of love: Now let us come to the object.

To all saints.] Where two things are to be remarked: the object of love, specified in this place, the saints; and the extent of the object, a// saints.

* * Necinformat fidem quoad esse nature, sed quoad esse meritorium.”

By saints the Apostle understands the baptised, and those who profess the Christian religion, as we have before shewn ;⁶⁰ for love presumes such to be true saints.

As to the object of love we must know, that the saints are neither its only nor primary object. For, as Augustine writes, De doctrin. Christ. i. 25, There are four objects of our love; one, that which is above us, viz. God ; another, that which is ourselves ; the third, that which is near to us, viz. our neighbour ; the fourth, that which is beneath us, viz. our own body. Concerning each of these we shall speak somewhat briefly.

l, First, then, the principal, and also the formal object of love, is God himself: for he is loved for himself, all other things in their relation to him, and as far as they participate, or are able to participate the Divine likeness and blessedness. When, therefore, the Apostle celebrates the love of the Colossians to the saints, he does not exclude, but necessarily supposes love to God. For as a colour is not seen without light, because light is the medium of seeing colour: so our neighbour is not loved without the love of God, because God is the medium of our loving our neighbour. Hence the Saviour in those two great commands places foremost the love of God, as the cause and fountain of the love of our neighbour. Matth. xxii. 37— 39. Hence also Augustine, Confess. lib. 10, cap. 29, observes, He loves thee less than is right, who together with thee loves any thing else for any other cause than because he loves thee.

2. Augustine places oneself as the second object of love to every one, and that rightly. For as the Philosopher (Aristotle) has observed, Eth. ix. cap. 8, Aw’ ávrov erá la va QNA, uel meds ToUs “aArrous dinner: All kindly feelings proceed from oneself towards others. And God himself in the command of loving our neighbour includes the love of oneself; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Plain reason also evinces this. For since love is founded upon the communication of the divine fruition or blessedness, every one, so far as he understands that he can be a partaker of the divine fruition, is bound to love himself, and to desire that divine good to himself which is the proper subject, of love.

Nay, we may moreover add, that no one is able to love God truly,⁶¹ who at the same time does not truly love himself: for he who loves God, wishes to enjoy the divine blessedness; but to wish this good to himself is to love himself traly. Furthermore, every one wishes the enjoyment of God to himself first, and more intensely than to another; so that if it could not be vouchsafed to more, every one had rather it should be communicated to himself by God than to another. And the reason is, because more causes concur to make him in this manner love himself rather than another. For another may fall from this divine good without my loss or fault, but I myself cannot.

But it may be asked, if every one is bound to love himself, and that more intently than another with this kind of love, why is there no express and direct precept concerning the loving oneself? Nay, why is the love of oneself condemned, 2 Tim. iii. 2, Men shall be lovers of themselves. .

It is solved thus : Since to love God is to love oneself, therefore when it is commanded that we love God, it is commanded in effect that we love ourselves. For he who loves God wishes to enjoy God, desires to be united to God; he wishes therefore the chief and greatest good to himself, and hence he loves himself as much as possible. Also, it may be replied, that the written law was given in aid of the law of nature, which was obscured through sin ; yet was not so obscured, but that it might move any one to love himself: therefore an express command concerning the love of oneself was not necessary. But as to what is said that the love of oneself is condemned in Scripture, it must be understood concerning an inordinate love which respects sensible good, not of that kind of love which has respect to divine good. For no one can too much love, or too much desire for himself spiritual good things; but sensible and transitory ones he may; and in this consists that love which is to be blamed.

3. I now come to the third object of love, which our present design has chiefly in view; and this is that which is near to us (as Augustine says), i.e. our neighbour.⁶²

But a person is called a neighbour not from consangutnity only, but from a mutual participation of reason, as the gloss has it. So also Justin Martyr, A man’s neighbour is nothing else, but a being participating in a similar condition and in rational faculiies.⁶³ But this must be observed by the way, that a neighbour is loved by us with true love, not simply as he is a partaker of rational nature, but so far as that rational nature may be a partaker of the d⁶⁴ vine blessedness : for love is founded in the mutual participation of the divine fruition, as was before observed. Among neighbours therefore, i. e. among men, the especial objects of our love are holy men, as the Apostle both here and elsewhere teaches; as in the Epistle to the Galatians, vi. 10, Let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith. So Augustine, The more holy members are to be embraced with u greater love. And the venerable Bede ; The union of hearts is more sacred than that of bodies.* But it is easy to assign a reason, why the saints are more to be loved by us than others, viz. because that which is the formal reason of love, is more visible in them than others: For as those objects are better seen, which are placed more in the light, because light is the formal object of vision; so those men are more loved, who are more united to God, because God is the formal and proper object of love.

The last object of love Augustine makes to be, the human body : which he has therefore done, because love being founded upon the communication of divine blessedness, whatever may participate that blessedness may be the object of love. But now, although our body cannot enjoy the divine blessedness in knowing and in loving God, yet it may be the instrument in many works of piety of a soul that does know and love God ; whence from the beatification of the soul redounds a certain incidental blessedness to the body, viz. the blessedness of immortality and incapability of suffering.—So much concerning the objects of love. Now let us consider the extent of that object which is here expressed by the Apostle. He would have love to extend to all saints, i. e. professors of true religion.

All.] When the Apostle extends love to all saints, he is to be understood, not only concerning the internal affection, but the external exercise of love, which is discerned in liberality and beneficence towards those who stand in need of our aid, For, as much as in us lies, we ought to be beneficent towards all, not only our neighbours or relalations, but strangers, nay enemies and wicked men.* Concerning strangers we have the practice of the apostolic Church: The Macedonians and Achaians made a collection for the poor saints that dwelt at Jerusalem, Rom. xv. 26. So the Corinthians are excited to supply the wants of others from their abundance, 2 Epis. viii. 13.+ So Gains is praised for his love toward strangers, 3 Epis. John, ver. 5. Well spake Lactantius, What we give to our relatives through affection, we should give to strangers from philanthropy. It is a saying of a Grecian poet, Jhat a good man, if he abound in riches, is a common treasure. The Scripture in many places enjoins that enemies should be loved: Do good to them that hate you, Matth. v. 44; and Rom. xii. 10, If thine enemy hunger, feed him; Whence that saying of Tertullian to Scapula, It is the custom of all to love their friends; but it is the peculiarity of Christians to love their enemies. And this especially points out the power and⁶⁵⁶⁶

* Scapula, the President and Proconsul of Africa; to whom Tertullian wrote in consequence of his improper conduct towards the Christians in his Province, pleading their cause in as admirable an address as he had before composed in their behalf under the persecution of the Emperor Severus. The Romish Church, professing the Religion of Jesus Christ, yet seems to have always retained the character of her Pagan ancestors, and not content with retaining a barbarous hostility towards her enemies in principle, has ever evinced the same towards those, partakers indeed of faith and love, but unable to comply with her superstitions. Hence her principle and conduct towards all those, whom she deems heretics, is hatred, persecution, and—if possible—extermination; and she has ever gloried in the effects, the more appalling they have been to humanity. For historic evidence of this, let the Reader look into “ Townsend’s Accusations,” p. 248. In addition to the statements there given of the exulting commemoration of the 4 massacre of St. Bartholomew’s day, the writer may add, on the testimony of a friend before referred to, p. 13, who recently visited Rome, and communicated the fact to him, that two scenes of that massacre were painted in Fresco by the famous Vasari, on the walls of a noble chamber in the Vatican! One is the murder of Coligny. The figures are of the natural size, and the scientific painter has fully represented the horrors of the scene. This chamber forms the communication between the Pauline and Sistine Chapels, where the great mysteries of the Roman Catholic Church are celebrated by the Pope in person ; and when the Pontiff carries * the body of Christ’ every Easter, from one to the other, he passes within two yards of the representation of the dead body of Coligny, preserved as a triumph of Holy Mother Church ! ! -

As facts of this kind are often most disingenuously denied, when it is supposed proof is not at hand, the following confirmation must be deemed decisive and important by all who would not abjure common sense. It is the spontaneous and express testimony of the Jesuit Bonanni, in his Numis Pont. Rome 1699, Tom. 1, under Greg. XIII. p. 336, where he is describing the notorious medal struck on the occasion HucoxoTTORUM Srraces. He not only particularly relates the public rejoicings which then took place at Rome, but affirms with relation to the painting in the efficacy of love. For as that fire is hotter and stronger which not only is able to warm things that are near, but such as are far remote; so that love is the more perfect and lively, which not only extends to neighbours, but to those most distant, i. e. to enemies. Neither ought we to think this love of enemies to be a matter of advice, but of command ; for he loves not God above all things, who does not love an enemy : which may be thus demonstrated :

In every enemy of ours two qualities are found : one which is a ground of love, viz. a participation of the divine likeness, and the possibility of his participation of blessedness : another which is the ground of hatred, viz. that he inflicts an injury upon us, and opposes us: if therefore, setting aside the ground of love, we are altogether converted into hatred, our enmity outweighs divine love. Now, as to men openly wicked, such as are given to drunkenness, adultery, perjury, Christian love does not desert even these. For love hopeth all things; 1 Cor. xiii. 7 ; it therefore hopes that these may be converted to God; and that they may become partakers of the communion of saints and of eternal blessedness: Therefore the godly man hates the wicked man, but with a perfect hatred : but a perfect hatred is that which is neither defective in justice, nor knowledge, i. e. that you neither hate the men on account of their vices, nor love the vices on account of the men.⁶⁷

From these considerations, therefore, it is manifest, that Christian love embraces every rational creature except devils and the damned ; because all either are, or at least as far as we know, may be partakers of holiness and blessedness. But devils and the damned love forsakes, because God has forsaken them: therefore we cannot desire to them the good of eternal life, to which love chiefly has respect; because this would be repugnant to love, which approves the justice of God, and acquiesces in his revealed will.

And these things may suffice concerning the virtue of love, the object, and the extent of the object: and having dwelt so long upon these heads, we must pass over the inferences which might be drawn either for instruction, or for direction, or even reproof, and proceed.

Verse 5.

In the former verse the Apostle has explained the causes of his giving of thanks, viz. the faith and love of the Colossians: now he proceeds to illustrate and confirm the same, from the final and instrumental causes. The final cause, the hope laid up in heaven: the instrumental cause, the word of the Gospel. But because the connection and even the sense of these words is disputed, these doubts must be cleared away, before we proceed to treat the subject matter.

Some connect these words, because of the hope which is laid up for you, with that expression, we give thanks, which is placed in the beginning of the third verse, in this sense ; We give thanks to God having heard of your faith and 78 AN EXPOSITION OF 8T. PAUL’S Chap. i. love, because from hence we understand you to be of the number of those for whom an eternal reward is laid up in heaven. So Athanasius.

Others refer these words to the verse immediately preceding in this sense; We give thanks to God having heard of your faith and love, which faith and love ye have embraced, and persevere in, on account of the hope laid up in heaven, i.e. on account of celestial blessedness. For hope here is put for the things hoped for, as faith is often taken for those things which are believed. So Chrysostom and Theodoret. Now let us return to the words ef the Apostle.

For the hope which is laid up, &c.] Some one of the Colossians might ask from Paul, Why do you give such thanks to God for our faith and love? What good shall accrue to us from thence? Do you not see plainly that the faithful and godly are despised and trodden upon by all? Paul answers, I give thanks not on account of the temporal advantage which you are about to derive, but on account of the heavenly felicity, which from thence I know to be reserved for you.

And here three things must be observed: The name of the heavenly reward ; it is called hope, our hope. The manner: the reward is not said to be conferred immediately, nor only proposed and offered, but laid up, set apart for us. Lastly, the place must be remarked, in heaven.

For the hope.] Under the name of hope is comprehended whatever of good is to be expected in the life of glory. And by this word he intended to point out celestial happiness;

First, that from hence we may understand that this reward is to be expected by us with patience: for so the Apostle in writing to the Romans viii. 25, says, If we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it. A patient expectation is the proper effect of hope, and therefore very necessary ; because whatever is hoped for, is deferred: and delay by its very nature is distressing, unless patience attend us to sustain the mind. And this is the language of patience, which Tertullian expresses in his book De Anima; Some one may I ask, When shall 1 come to this hoped for joy? Patience answers, When God shall be pleased to give it: for no delay of that which will certainly come is long.

Secondly, The promised blessedness is called our hope, ‘ i. e. the thing which we hope for: through an Antonomasia;⁶⁸ that hence we may be led to consider that this object alone is worthy of our hope; and that other frail and transitory things which are commonly hoped for and sought after, are, in comparison with this heavenly prize, rather to be trampled under foot than hoped for or sought after.

Lastly, By this term the carnal and worldly are reproved, who neither care nor hope for future blessedness ; they covet only the pleasures of the present life, and into those they plunge themselves. But as Cyprian speaks, De bono patient, The very fact itself of our being Christians is the substance of hope. If you find not comfort and pleasure in the things hoped for, you are a Christian in vain. Thus far concerning the name of this treasure.

Laid up, aoxtiuévw.] Here he intimates the manner of the reward, that is to say, the way in which it concerns us in the present time. It is not given to us nor are we brought into the possession of it immediately: for this ‘ would subvert the nature of hope, and of the thing hoped for. For the present possession of any thing is enjoyment, not hope. Whence the Apostle, Hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he hope for it? Rom. viii. 24. Neither is it said that this prize is only offered to us, and proposed; for it would weaken our hope, if the certainty of the things hoped for should depend upon ourselves and our disposition, so as either to be given to us or denied, according to the merit of our works. Butitis said to be laid up for us, i. e. hidden in reserve with God our Father. But if any thing be in reserve for us, even with a good and honest man, we entertain no doubt concerning its future recovery ; nay, our goods are placed for that end with another, through fear of their not being in safety with ourselves. When therefore the Apostle calls the kingdom of heaven the hope laid up for us, he shews that the godly ought to be certain of the attainment of life eternal; because it is as a treasure kept in store for his children by God himself their Father. Hence that saying of Christ, Luke xii.32, Fear not little flock, for it is your Father good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Admirably writes Clemens Alexandrinus concerning the certainty of the godly. A faithful man hath the God whom he has loved ; and by faith has received what is uncertain to others; aud he obtains the promise «gare emayyenas ; he possesses future things as present : nay he hath so certain a persuasion, that he makes more sure of them than of present things. But whence this so great certainty, unless because he knows that this treasure is laid up for him?

In heaven.] Behold the place where this treasure is! From which we learn that such is the nature of this treasure, that when once possessed it never afterwards can be taken away. For so says the Saviour, Luke xii. 33, Hither thief approacheth not, nor moth corrupteth any thing here: as though he would say that all things laid up in heaven, are beyond the toss of fortune, and the danger of loss.

Secondly, from the fact that the reward hoped for is laid up i heaven, we are given to understand, that it is not any thing low or mean, but divine, magnificent, and plainly celestial. Concerning all earthly things, Prudentius (Hymno ad Galli cant.) hath well said,

Aurum, voluptas, guadium,—opes, honores, prospera,

Qusecunque nos inflant mala, —fit mane, nil sunt omnia.⁶⁹

But as these earthly things pass away and vanish, and have nothing fixed or permanent about them; so heavenly things stand on the solid basis of their perpetuity, and have nothing fading or transitory: Parisiensis de retribut. sanctorum.

Lastly, if our hope be laid up in heaven, there ought our mind to be perpetually directed : for where the treasure is, there is the heart, Luke xi. 34. That saying of Paul is the saying of every true Christian; We have our conversation in heaven, from whence we look for the Saviour, Phil. iii. 20. Upon this, Clemens has elegantly observed that every faithful person, even upon earth, verges upon a celestial nature and life. Strom. 2. But such a forgetfulness of heavenly things hath taken possession of us, that that saying of Prudentius may justly be turned upon us,

Nenmo animum summi memorem genitoris in altum,

Excitat, ad coelum mittit suspiria nemo.⁷⁰ .

In Hamart.

And these things concerning the prize hoped for, concerning the manner in which it respects us in the present life, and also concerning the place where it is lodged. It remains that we say something of that interpretation of Chrysostom and Theodoret, which we adverted to above.

These words, for the hope laid up for you in heaven, Chrysostom refers to the love and faith of the Colossians; as J though he would say, Ye have believed, and have exercised love towards the brethren on account of the hope laid up for you in heaven, i. e. on account of the reward of celestial blessedness. It is necessary to say something concerning this interpretation, inasmuch as the words bear it, and many interpreters follow it.⁷¹

But because it agrees in other respects with the former interpretation, while in this one it differs, that it makes the hope reserved in heaven, the motive, not in respect of Paul’s giving thanks, but of the faith and love of the Colossians ; we shall discuss only this one question ;

Whether it is lawful to do good works, such as to believe in Christ, to love the saints, with a view to, or for the sake of the reward reserved in heaven ?

Against this is objected John x. 12, where the Saviour reprehends hirelings, who propose to themselves their own advantage in feeding the sheep of God.

To this we answer, They are not blamed because they expect the eternal reward promised by God to well-doers, but because they had respect to temporal reward, and that alone ; and in the mean time neglected the work commanded by God: he is au hireling, and cares not for the sheep, verse 13.

It is objected, secondly, that it is the way of servants, not of sons, to work for the sake of reward: but we are sons; therefore we ought not to regard the reward in our work.

I answer, to work for the sake of reward, as he does who would not serve God without reward, is truly sordid and servile, neither becomes a son loving his father; but whilst labouring, to have respect to the reward promised by our father, is neither servile nor sordid.

Thirdly, to believe in God, or to love God (or one’s neighbour) on account of the reward of blessedness, is to love for the sake of something else: but we ought not to believe in God, or to love God on account of any thing else, but for his own sake; consequently not because of the reward of blessedness.

I answer, God himself is the reward promised to the faithful ; therefore whilst they expect and regard an eternal reward, they expect nothing but God. But if we understand the reward to be not God himself, but the very act of enjoying God ; then it must be answered otherwise, viz. that this reward is not to be so regarded, that it should be the end for which we love God, but only that it should be the end of our action, i. e. of our affection and love: And this is allowed ; because a less good is lawfully made subordinate to a greater, as to its end ; yet the enjoyment itself of God at home is a greater good than faith or the love of’ God by the way ; therefore faith and love are lawfully subordinate to that as to the end.

Even some Fathers are quoted against this opinion. Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom. 4, asserts, that a good and perfect man does no good, either through the fear of punishment, or because of the hope of reward, whether from men, or from God himself. Bernard, in his book De amore Dei, is cited by Durandus in support of this opinion, Though God cannot be loved without reward, nevertheless he is not to be served with a view to the reward.

The same answer may be given to both; viz. that the. reward ought not to be regarded as the only, or even as the principal motive, but God and his glory is to be regarded as the ultimate end : whilst our heavenly felicity is to be regarded as an end subordinate to that: for we aim at the reward of blessedness, that we may love God more securely and ardently for ever.

These objections being answered, the truth must be established by reasons drawn from Scripture. :

1. What was done by the saints and commended in the Scriptures, it is lawful to do; but the saints had respect to this reward, and it is recited to their praise. David in Ps. cxix. 112, says, I have inclined my heart to perform thy statutes, even unto the end.⁷² Moses, Heb. xi. 26, is said to have looked to the recompence of reward, d&méBremev eis picSamodociay. Paul to the Philips. iii. 14, J press towards the mark for the prize of the high calling.

2. Right reason directs the agent to regard the end of his action: for it is of the nature of an end that it should be aimed at, and from the desire of it excite the doer to action; for the end is the principle from which in actions the practical intellect reasons concerning those things which relate to the end. But the reward of blessedness is the end proposed to faith, and love, and to all good works, as is evident from 1 Peter i. 9, that ye may receive the end of your faith, the salvation of your souls.

3. God himself offers this reward to those who do well: therefore he wishes that to be regarded by us ; nay, he bids us to regard it. For he would have given no promises of blessedness to the pious, unless he wished that we should have respect to them whilst acting well. In Matth. vi. 33, we are commanded to seek first the kingdom of God: but who seeks what he is not permitted to regard ? In 1 Tim. iv. 8, it is said, Godliness hath the promises of the life that now is, and of that which is to come; but in vain if it be not lawful to be excited to do well by the prospect of them.

We conclude, therefore, that a reward to good works is proposed by God, and that it ought to be regarded by us,

1. That hence we may learn the will and munificence of God.

2. That we may exercise hope and faith by fixing our view upon it.

3. That hence we may be excited to cheerfulness in ) good works.

But we ought not to regard and look to the reward;

1. So as to be unwilling to serve God if there were no reward.

2. So as to set the blessedness itself as our end in loving God.

3. So as to infer any merit in our good works from the reward being proposed.

Hitherto we have treated of the final cause of the faith and love of the Colossians: It now remains to speak of the instrumental cause in these words, Which ye heard before in the word of the truth of the Gospel.

The Apostle shews in these words whence the Colossians conceived the hope of obtaining this celestial blessedness ; to wit, from the Gospel preached to them before by Epaphras. But here are two things to be noticed by us: the instrument of producing faith and hope in general, viz. the word of God heard ; in particular the word of the Gospel, which is distinguished by an adjunct, viz. truth.

As to what pertains to the first, the things which are hoped for and believed by Christians, are placed beyond human reach; therefore that they may become known to us, there is need not only of human, but of divine instruction. But the word of God is the organ of this divine instruction, according to that appeal in Rom. x. 14, How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher ?

But here we must shew more explicitly in what sense the word preached by men becomes the instrument of producing faith and hope, since faith and hope are free gifts: derived immediately from the fountain of grace, Jas. i. 17.

We must know therefore, that two things concur to produce faith or hope; a knowledge of the things to be believed or hoped for; and the assent of the heart. This knowledge arises from hearing the word: for the knowledge of salvation is not communicated to men in these times by extraordinary revelations or inspirations ; but the word preached is the power of God unto salvation to all “ that believe. Therefore as to the propounding and knowledge of the things to be believed and expected, hope and faith depend upon hearing as a necessary instrument. But then, as to the internal assent of the heart, whereby every one firmly apprehends and applies the doctrine proposed to be believed and hoped in to his own comfort, this assent arises from feelings of hope and faith infused by the internal operation of the Spirit. Therefore the doctrine of faith and hope is promulgated by man, but the habits of faith and hope are infused and implanted by God himself. Whence Clemens, Pedag. 1, “Huey xarnynais 15 wforw megidyer, mistis OB aylw maldevéron aveyuatt, lustruction indeed leads to faith, but faith is also taught by the Holy Spirit. And here that celebrated saying of Augustine applies, Think not that man can learn any thing from man: if there be no teacher within, all our babbling is in vain. There are certain outward assistant teachers and admonitions ; he who teacheth the heart hath his seat in heaven.⁷³ So the Apostle to the Hebrews iv.2, The word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

Therefore God himself is the Creator of faith and hope in the hearts of men: but the hearing the word of God is the instrumental cause ; as well because it shews the object and proposes it to the mind of the person believing or hoping; as because those habits of faith and hope are not imparted to sleepers, or to those occupied any other way, but to hearers of the word of God, and to those meditating in the same; on which account the word is called the ministration of the Spirit, 2 Cor. iii. 8. Contemners of the word are void of the hope of salvation.—Thus much concerning the general instrument, viz. the word of God.

Through the word of the truth of the Gospel.] Now he declares in particular whence the hope of eternal life springs. For the divine word is not adapted in every part to produce hope ; nay the law serves to arouse fear. Hope, therefore, arises, not from the preaching of the legal covenant, This do and thou shalt live; but from the promulgation of the evangelical covenant, Believe, and thou shalt be saved. Well spake Tertullian, advers. Marc. iii. cap. 16, The possession of eternal life comes not to us through the discipline of the law, but through the grace of the Gospel. As the possession is through grace, not through the law, so the hope of the possession is excited through the preaching of the grace of the gospel, not of the doctrine of the law. They who expect eternal life from the covenant of works, do not hope, but presume. But it has been shewn before by us, that the proper object of faith and hope, is, not all those things in general which are delivered in the word, but the promises of grace: it is not necessary therefore to take up more time in explanation or proof of this matter.

The word of the truth.] The Apostle distinguishes the Gospel by a paraphrastic expression. Erasmus* translates it the veracious word, because the genitive of a substantive should be often rendered by an adjective, after the usage of the Hebrew language. But he has not sufficiently reached either the meaning or force of Paul’s expression. For both the doctrine of the law is the veracious word, and many doctrines of the Philosophers are true; but the word of truth, is (by way of eminence) appropriated to the Gospel.

* Erasmus, well known by his philological and theological treatises as an able scholar and useful writer; the ‘‘IlIgódpouoc,” says Aubery, “ of our knowledge, and the man that made the rough and untrodden ways smooth and passable.” He was born at Rotterdam in 1467, and educated in an excellent school at Dusseldorf, in Cleveland ; and at nineteen years of age entered among the regular Canons of the Monastery of Stein. From thence he went into France, visited Paris, and studied in the College of Montaigne. Obtaining there some English pupils, he was induced to visit this country, and studied awhile at Oxford ; afterwards he travelled into Italy, and gained great reputation. He came again into England, on the express invitation of Henry VIIL, at whose Court he flourished about the commencement of the sixteenth century ; and also became further distinguished by Lectures read in Greek and Theology to the students at Cambridge, in which University he was appointed Lady Margaret’s Professor about 1511, and was presented to a Prebendary by Wolsey, and afterwards to the Rectory of Aldington,in Kent. But though thus naturalised, as it were, , here, he returned again to the Continent, and was created Counsellor to Prince Charles of Austria. He did not, however, stay long at the Austrian Court, but withdrew to Basil, and spent his latter days in active literary employ with friends he had made there. He entered warmly into the affairs of the Reformation, and in 1516 published his celebrated New Testament, in Greek and Latin, which was received with the utmost eagerness by all those whose minds were turned to Theological pursuits: yet there were many others tv whom the publication of the various Editions of the Scriptures by Erasmus and his brother Reformers, and the circulation of * THE WORD of THE TRUTH” by their means, was most offensive. It alarmed the profligate and illiterate Monks. They declared from the pulpit, * that there was now a new language discovered, called Greek, of which people should be aware, since it was that which produced all the heresies—that in this language was come forth a book called the New Testament, which was in every body’s hands, and was full of thorns and briars—that there was also another language started up, called Hebrew, and that they who learnt it became Jews!’ Besides such efforts to promote learning, Erasmus built a School at Rotterdam, endowed it, and directed the order of the Institution. But it is unnecessary to dwell upon his life, though full of interest and incident ; it has been written at length by different hands, besides the prin-

A twofold reason may be assigned for this; First, because what is most excellent in any kind, is wont (per antonomasian⁷⁴) to claim its generic name as by special prerogative. Since, therefore, among the various kinds of truths, saving truth is more excellent than the rest ; the doctrine of salvation is called the doctrine of the truth. The doctrine of the law, since we are become weak through sin, becomes a doctrine of death ; the doctrine of the Philosophers relates to men as citizens, not as touching their salvation ; the doctrine of the Gospel therefore remains, which alone is saving, and therefore is alone called, by way of eminence, the word of the truth, i. e. saving truth.

Secondly, the Gospel may be called the word of the truth because it is the word concerning Christ, who is the way, the life, and the truth; John xiv. 6. For Christ is the true body, in comparison with which the legal rites and ceremonies were shadows and figures: whence that word, The law was given by Moses, grace a)id truth by Jesus Christ, Johni.17. And John viu. 31, Jf ye continue in. my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. Since, therefore, Christ is the truth, and the Gospel hath Christ, both as its author and its object, it is most aptly called the word of the truth.

I must not here proceed to such observations as may be deduced from what has been hitherto advanced concerning the instrumental cause of producing faith in particular, and also from this title whereby the Gospel is distinguished, being anxious to hasten forward to the verses which follow.⁷⁵

Verse 6.

Paul in the preceding verse celebrated the Gospel, inasmuch as it was the instrumental cause of producing hope in the hearts of the Colossians: but he still advances in his praises of the same gospel. For it is the custom of this Apostle, having once named the Gospel, forthwith to launch out in commendation of it. Which he does the more freely in this place, because having commended the Gospel, both the Colossians who so readily received it, and Epaphras who so faithfully preached it among them, are associated by him in that commendation.

Now let us come to the text.

In it the Apostle introduces three things: First, he shews the diffusion of the Gospel, in particular—zt is come to you; in general—and to all the world. Secondly, he declares its efficacy, it bears fruit ; where the Vulgate, and Chrysostom also add a word which is wanting in our ver- sions, viz. et crescit, xa] àv£avóusvo, and increases. Thirdly, he extends this efficacy from the circumstance of time, since the day ye heard, &c. [ Which is come unto you, tov wapévros tij uds.] Here the goodness, and the love of God towards the Colossians shines forth : For the Colossians had not come to the Gospel, but the Gospel to them. “The sick are wont to seek physicians, and to provide medicines at their own expence ; but the heavenly Physician seeks the sick, freely sends the medicine of the Gospel to them who are neither looking for, nor thinking of it. So the prophet, Isa. Ixv. 1, I am found of them who sought me not. And the Saviour himself says, Luke xix. 10, The Son of man is come to seek, and to save that which was lost, Upon this Cyprian observes, De Baptismo Christi, The beloved of the Father loved us without any desert of ours, of his own free grace bestowed on us the benefit of his advent, of his own free grace healed us, of his own free grace cured us.

From this also, human misery and infirmity are apparent : for we cannot live by the powers of nature and the freedom of the will, so as to merit, from the grace of congruity, the light of the Gospel. Some of the Schoolmen have fancied that a man who has turned his natural good disposition (bonis naturalibus, as they say) to good account, deserves, of congruity, that God should impart to him the knowledge of the saving Gospel and other benefits gratuitously. Whence Durandus; Thereis no one, if he does what is in his power, but God will reveal to him all those things without which there is no salvation. And elsewhere; He who lives well according to the law of nature, God will aid in things necessary to salvation. But we know that the Gospel came not to Socrates, Phocion, Aristides, Cato, Seneca, and others, who turned their natural good dispositions to better account than those Corinthians to whom it came, who were whoremongers, thieves, drunkards, &c. 1 Cor. vi. 10. Therefore as the Gospel came to the Colossians, not called for by their merits, but voluntarily offered by the divine goodness; so also we must think concerning all others. It s emphatically expressed (says Gerson⁷⁶) in the Lord’s Prayer— Let thy kingdom come, 1. e. let it come to us, because we are not able by any inward power of our own to go to it.

As also in all the world.] To the particular extension of the Gospel to the Colossians, he adds its general diffusion in all the world. For the Gospel is compared to the sun, which traverses and illuminates all parts of the globe. This light the Apostles and disciples of our Saviour spread about. Paul himself preached the Gospel from Jerusalem as far as to Illyricum; Mark, in Egypt ; Matthew, in Ethiopia; Thomas, in India; Simon Zelotes, in Britain; and others, elsewhere: And Ecclesiastical writers relate what provinces each of the seventy disciples traversed in their preaching. The most ancient Fathers also speak of the Gospel as even then disseminated among the most remote nations. We shall be content with the testimonies of Justin Martyr, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Tertullian.* There exists no race of men, whether of Barbarians or Greeks, or bearing any other designation ; either of those who use their traines for dwellings,+ or of those who dwell in tents,{ or of those who know not the use of dwellings, among whom prayers are not offered up in the name of the crucified Jesus, &c. Justin Martyr, Dialog. cum Tryphon. The word is withheld from none, the light is common, it hath shone to all men: there is no Cimmerius§ in the word. Clemens Alexandrinus has these words; Whom have all people heard of? In whom have all nations believed, unless in Christ? Tertullian, after enumerating all nations, adds concerning us; The abodes of the Britons, inaccessible to the Romans, yet have been brought under subjection to Christ.|j And elsewhere; advers. Marc. he asserts, That Christ had captivated the whole world by faith in his Gospel.^77787980

But here a doubt is started by some, who think the Gospel could not have spread into all the world in so short a space of time, as for instance, forty or fifty years. They also urge that objection, that many nations, nay, another hemisphere is now discovered, which was unknown in the times of the Apostles.

Now to this it may be replied, first; That expression into all the world is to be explained (by synecdoche) for the greatest part of the world. For we must not think that the Apostles penetrated into all the corners of the known world; but into the most noted provinces, and especially preached the Gospel in the great cities, i. e. they diffused it far and wide. So Luke ii. 1, There went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed, 1. e. all the provinces subjected to the Roman Empire. So John xii. 19, All the world is gone after him, i. e. men of all kinds indiscriminately.

Secondly, the Gospel is come into all the world, inasmuch as a school of Evangelical doctrine is open to all the world, although it may not be preached in particular places. It is opposed, therefore, to the doctrine of Moses, which was open to one nation only, whereas access may be had to the Gospel for all nations. Whence that saying of the : Apostle, Titus ii. 11, The grace of God that briugeth salvation hath appeared to all men. Not that the preachers of the Gospel, bestirring themselves in all directions, could preach to all and every one; but the preaching of Gospel grace is offered to all and every one without distinction of nations.

But as to what is objected in the last place about the New world, viz. that the Gospel was never known to those people, since they were unknown in the times of the Apostles; I answer, First, that this is uncertain; for we learn from Ecclesiastical history, that the Gospel penetrated into the farthest coast of the Eastern India; and the most learned men (among whom is Arias Montanus, in libro Phaleg.⁸¹) think the Eastern parts of this India were contiguous to the Western parts of America, or of the New World. Although this also could be answered, that those regions began to be inhabited, long after the times of the Apostles; yet when the Gospel is said to have come into all the world, it is understood into those parts of the world which were inhabited by men. It is now quite clear that the Gospel was preached in all the world.—But why does the Apostle introduce the mention of this thing in this place?

First, that he might shew the prophecies of the ancients to have been truly fulfilled, and also of Christ the Saviour, concerning the calling of the Gentiles, and the propagation of the Gospel. The Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising, Isa. lx. 3. The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light, ibid. ix. 2. This Gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world, Matth. xxiv.14. This could not but confirm the Colossians in the doctrine of the Gospel, when they understood that it was destined for the Gentiles, by the divine decree, from the beginning of the world.

Secondly, (as Chrysostom has observed), because persons are confirmed in the faith from having many associates in their tenets. For although the multitude of those who err does not procure credit for error; yet a multitude of persons concurring in the truth, strengthens the minds of the faithful, and as it were reproaches unbelievers with their infidelity. Whence that remark of Augustine, Whoever now requires miracles to establish his faith, is in himself a mighty miracle, who, in the midst of a believing world, does not himself believe. De Civitat. Dei. xxii. 8.⁸²

Lastly. the Apostle calls to mind the propagation of the Gospel through the whole world, that the Colossians might hence understand that those new doctrines of the Philosophers and Seducers, which began to be sown in that Church, were not a part of the Gospel, because they were not propagated by the Apostles through the whole world. And with this same argument we disprove all the errors of the Papists: For they can never prove either the supremacy of the Pope of Rome, or the infallibility of his authority, or the worship of images, or the sale of indulgences, or any other dogma in which they differ from us, to have been preached through the whole world by the Apostles or their coadjutors: Theirs, therefore, are not the decrees of the Gospel, but the silliest imagination of lying dreamers; wherefore the faith of Christians is not bound by them. Shrewdly spake Tertullian, When we believe the Gospel we have no liking for any thing further: for this we first believe, that . there is not any thing beyond it that we ought to believe.⁸³—So much concerning the diffusion of the Gospel: Now of its efficacy.

And bringeth forth fruit.] Here we must supply, in all the world, as it doth in you; we may also add, (what is found in many copies), and increaseth.

These first words, and bringeth forth fruit, shew the efficacy of the Gospel in producing faith, love, and holiness in the hearts of them that hear; in regard to which, preaching is aptly compared to sowing, and the word to seed, which, cast into the ground, bringeth forth fruit, some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty, Matth. xiii.

The Apostle, therefore, here speaks of that spiritual fruit which is perceived in conversion, and in the entire change of manners and hearts, when men overwhelmed before in vices, begin to bloom in virtue, and become resplendent in holiness.⁸⁴

The Fathers every where laud this efficacy of the Gospel. Clemens Alexand. in Protrept, for instance where he says, The Gospel of Christ hath tamed the fiercest beasts, viz. very wicked men: and Lactantius, Instit. iii. cap. 26,⁸⁵ observes, The wisdom of philosophers does not extirpate vices, but conceals them: the precepts of God change the whole man, and, the old Adam being cast out, they render him A NEW CREATURE. This is depicted in the Prophet Isaiah by an elegant similitude, lv. 10; As the rain cometh down from heaven, and returneth not thither again, but watereth the earth and maketh it bring forth and bud ; so shall my word not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

And on this passage, it is worth while to observe, that the Apostle immediately subjoius the bearing of fruit to the preaching and hearing of the Gospel: From which fact he teaches us that the power of the Gospel, consists not so much in the illumination of the understanding, as in the reformation of the will. If this tree be not made good, and ° produce not the good fruits of holiness and newness of life, in vain we glory in the Gospel; which falls upon unholy men not as a benefit, but as their condemnation. Heb. vi. 7, The earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and beareth thorns and briars, is rejected and is nigh unto cursing.

And increaseth.] This is found in various copies, and is expressed by the Syriac translation ; which words ° shew the efficacy of the Gospel in the multitude of those professing it. For it is said to increase when the number of those increases who embrace the Christian faith. And truly in this sense the Gospel has increased to a miracle, The Grecian philosophy (says Clemens) if any magistrate prohibited it, immediately died away ; but the Kings of the earth opposed the Christian doctrine, and yet it increased. The Church had been harassed by ten continual persecutions under the Heathen emperors, yet, for all that, it was not even impaired by so many calamities: but as Augustine writes, Epis. 42, The Gentiles, and their idolatries, are overcome, not by the opposition, but by the death of the Christians.*⁸⁶

In the Acts of the Apostles, Luke in many places takes care to record this increase of the Christian Church, as a proof of the Divine protection and the power of the Gospel. Thus, ch. v. 14, The multitude of them that believed increased; and xvi. 5, The churches were established, and increased in numbers daily. It is no sign of Evangelical truth for its professors to propagate their Religion by arms (as the Mahometans do), or by fire and fraud (as the Papists); but when by preaching, or by patience, Religion prevails against those who oppose it, this is a strong argument that Divine assistance is present with its ministers. We have a clear evidence of this in the restoration of the Gospel through Luther and other pious men, in that it increased daily, whilst the Pope was gnashing his teeth, and the kings of the earth raging.—So far in regard to the diffusion and efficacy of the Gospel.

From the day ye heard it and knew the grace of God in truth.] He magnifies the efficacy of the Gospel in these words ; and, at the same time, extols as well the Gospel, as the Colossians themselves, and Epaphras too, as some think: the Gospel from its peculiar doctrine; the Colossians from their mode of hearing, and Epaphras from his mode of preaching.

The efficacy of the Gospel is magnified from the circumstance of time ; as soon as it was preached it began to work, and it continues still to work: Here is double praise bestowed upon the Colossians ; first, for their docility, because they had immediately embraced the Gospel ; secondly, for their constancy, because they hitherto persist and abide in the same.⁸⁷

Observe, Hearers of the Gospel must not procrastinate, but from the moment of its being preached they are bound both to believe it, and to bring forth fruit. Thus the Apostle, Heb. iii. 8, Jo-day, if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. And truly it is the voice of the devil which says, Give the present time to sin, the future to God and the Gospel; yield the flower of your age to sin, the residue to Religion.

Nor, secondly, is it sufficient, as soon as the Gospel is offered, to receive it with joy, and bring forth fruit ; but it behoves us to persevere in each, viz. both in faith and in holiness. The parable of the stony ground is well known, which received seed, and brought forth fruit, yet to which it is imputed as a fault, that those fruits withered away through the heat of the sun. This inconstancy is also blamed in the Ephesian church, Rev. ii. 4, I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love :—repent, and do the first works. The past things perish, says Cyprian, if those things which were begun cease to go on to perfection. . Cypr. De bon patient.

The grace of God.] He magnifies the Gospel from that peculiar feature whereby it is distinguished from the Law. For the Law declares the will of God imperatively, and imposes its mandates upon us; the Gospel shews the will of God savingly, and offers us grace in Christ: And these distinctions are not to be confounded by persons who would not obscure the Gospel.

Here the error of the Papacy is detected, who promise to the regenerate grace and salvation in the doctrine of the Law. For they teach that men are justified by inherent righteousness, and merit salvation by their works. If justification and salvation are by the Law, why should the Gospel be called the doctrine of grace, and be distinguished by this title from the Law? Let Paul decide this question, Rom. iii. By the works of the law shall no flesh be justified: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested—by the faith of Christ. For all have sinned and are justified freely by his grace, &c. Aquinas himself, convinced by such evident testimony, writes in this manner, The legitimate use of the law is, that man should not attribute to it what is not contained in it : the hope of justification therefore does not stand in moral precepts, but in faith alone. In Rom. iii.

In truth ’Ev ‘aaSefa.] These last words are explained very diversely. For some would have ’s ‘aan9ea to be nothing else than in the Gospel ; because the Gospel is before called the word of the truth. Therefore Paul here says that they knew the grace of God in the truth, 1. e. in the Gospel. Of this exposition we shall say nothing now, both because I do not much approve of it, and because I have before spoken concerning this title of the Gospel.

The second exposition is that of those who interpret in the truth to mean in truth and sincerity, free from all external disguise and hypocrisy ; and they refer this to the Colossians, and to their praise, who, not by outward pretence, but in reality, were embracing the Gospel.

Whence arises this clear evidence, that neither the name of Christian, nor of the Gospel, can any ways profit men, if the reality of the things themselves be wanting. For he who is not a true Christian, is not a Christian at all; he who is not truly Evangelical, is not Evangelical at all. For entity and truth are convertible terms, as the Metaphysicians are wont to say. Hence that rebuke denounced against the Angel of the church at Sardis, Rev. iii. 1, Thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead. But a mere name can have no place, either among the good or the bad, as says Justin Martyr, Apolog. 2.⁸⁸

The last exposition is that of those who refer these words to the praise of Epaphras, who had preached the Gospel truly and sincerely to the Colossians, unmixed with the error either of philosophical speculations, or the leven of Jewish superstition. Therefore it intimates that they ought to be persevering in the doctrine already known, nor should allow themselves to be carried away by any wind or new doctrine whatever; because the doctrine of the Gospel was before delivered to them in truth, but now to depart from the truth and embrace errors, was base and shameful.

And hitherto the Apostle has set forth the praises of the Gospel, from its extension, from its efficacy, from the circumstances of time, from its proper object, and, lastly, from the mode of its promulgation. In the next verse he passes from the praises of the Gospel to the praise of Epaphras, who had preached this Gospel to them.

Verses 7, 8.

In these two verses the Apostle is wholly intent upon sending back Epaphras, the minister of the Colossians, to . that church, with the strongest commendations. For it conduces much to the promotion of religion that a people think honourably of their prelates and ministers: for if the priests of God begin to be despised, religion will soon be despised, and the worship of God contemned ; which we see in the case of the Sons of Eli, 1 Sam. ii. 17. Here, therefore, we shall note three things in general ; and afterwards proceed to a particular exposition of the words.

1. By the example of Paul, ministers are taught not to decry others that themselves alone may stand pre-eminent, but to take as much care of the reputation and good esteem of others, as of their own: for whilst we turn our carpings and the scourge of our revilings upon one another, we, one and all, become spurned at and trampled upon by the laity.

2. Since the reputation of ministers is so essential to the Gospel, let us understand that each of us must strive to obtain a good report: therefore we ought not only to abstain from all evil, but from all appearance of evil. They are not to be listened to, says Augustine, who say that a good conscience before God is enough for them, and in the mean time recklessly despise the esteem of men. Whoever keeps his life from gross sin, does good to himself ; but whoever guards his reputation, is charitable towards others. Our good conduct is necessary for ourselves: our reputation for others, De bono viduit, cap. 22.

3. Since the unspotted reputation of ministers is a matter of such moment, let those persons consider how much guilt they fasten upon themselves, who, either by malevolent detractions call undeservedly into suspicion, or by witticisms and jokes expose to derision, those who, even on the mere ground of their vocation, ought to be honoured by men. That Poet spake piously, whoever he was, who said, Reputation, integrity, and the eye cannot be trifled with. Moreover, Theologians determine this detraction to be worse than theft: Both are bound to make restitution, viz. the robber and the detractor: but satisfaction is made much more easily for theft than for detraction; because the quantity of loss in the former may be known and estimated ; in the latter it cannot.—Let these general remarks suffice concerning that upon which the Apostle laid such stress, viz. that Epaphras, the minister of the Colossians, might be acceptable and honourable among his own people. And now let us treat, specifically, of those commendations which are heaped upon him by the Apostle.

As ye also learned of Epaphras, our dear fellow-servant.] In these words he commends Epaphras by a comparison, or reference to himself, and that on a two-fold ground: first, that he was dear to him; secondly, that he was his fellow-servant.

Dear.] On account of his sincerity in preaching the Gospel: for Paul embraced all those with a wondrous love who laboured faithfully in the Gospel. Now this was highly to the honour of Epaphras, that he was one of the bosom friends of Paul: for if it be to one’s honour to be commended by those who are themselves approved among men, then much more is it to one’s honour to be both commended and loved by them. Whilst, therefore, he calls him his beloved, he intimates that he ought to be beloved by them. The potter envies his fellow-potter, and the simith the smith; but it should not be so among ministers.

Our fellow-servant.] On account of the same office of preaching the Gospel, in which both served the same Master. But, when he calls him his fellow-servant, he puts the Colossians in mind by the way, that Epaphras was no common minister, but a general in the Gospel warfare, and their Apostle, as it were.

And here we should mark the humility and candour of such a man, who, placed, as he was, at the summit of Apostolic dignity, acknowledges Epaphras as his equal. They who, among the ministers of the Gospel, surpass others in rank and dignity, ought to imitate this humility. Humility is a bright ornament in all Christians; but it is brightest and greatest when seen in those who are most eminent and exalted.

He pursues the commendations of Epaphras still farther, on the ground of the character and relation in which he . stands to Christ and the Colossians.

Who is for you a faithful minister of Christ.] Here is a three-fold commendation of Epaphras: from his office or vocation, a minister of Christ; from the character of his ministry, a faithful minister ; from the design or end of his ministry, for you, i. e. for your salvation. Upon all these grounds, he ought to be held in the highest esteem and love among the Colossians.

A minister of Christ.] The word diduoves, Minister, which is used in the Greek text, is not employed in this place for the special office of taking care of the widows of the poor, to which duty the seven were chosen, Acts vi. 3; but in a larger sense, it is put for any dispenser of the divine word ; so that sometimes it comprehends the Apostles themselves, as in 1 Cor. iii. 5, Who is Paul, or who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed? in the Greek, ‘aaa’ # dianovor 0 àv ’emorévoate. But waving any remark upon the word, let us inquire into the dignity of the office itself. A minister of Christ ; 1. e. a minister of the Supreme King of heaven, of earth, and hell. Not even angels disdain to minister to and serve this Lord.

But a minister in what? (for this also adds much to the dignity of the ministry). Not in any mean or abject business, but in the dispensation of the most precious treasure, viz. Gospel grace. Among the ministers of kings, the treasurer is accounted one of the most honourable: how much honour therefore should people attach to those, through whom the treasure of the grace of the Gospel is dispensed to men? Such a minister was Epaphras ; and, therefore, worthy of being loved and honoured by the Colossians.

From this title, which is given to preachers of the word, many things may be deduced. l. That, since they are the ministers of Christ, they may not be despised, or injured with impunity, by any man. David avenged the injury done to his ambassadors by the Ammonites, in shaving their beards and cutting off their garments, 2 Sam. x.; how much more shall Christ avenge his ambassadors and ministers, if any thing be done against them injuriously or contumeliously, by Ammonites amongst us?

2. That, since they are ministers of this heavenly King, it behoves them not to set their hearts upon temporal advantages, but to look for a heavenly reward. This splendid recompence Christ promises to his servants, Dan. xii. 3, The wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament ; and they that turn many to righteousness, as the stars for ever and ever. Upon this crown Paul had his thoughts ever fixed, 2 Tim. iv. 8, There is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, &c.

Faithful.] This in a special manner conduces to the praise of Epaphras. It is a great thing to be a minister of Christ, i. e. a dispenser of the Gospel; but as the Apostle speaks, 1 Cor. iv. 2, It is required in stewards, or ministers, that every one be found faithful ; this faithfulness is particu- Jarly to be noted in two things :

1. In this, that a minister should always regard the honour of his Lord, not his own glory. But he regards the honour of God, who so speaks as the oracles of God, that God in all things may be glorified, 1 Pet. iv. 11; and he seeks his own glory who so speaks that he may please vain men, and be commended by them either on account of genius, or learning, or eloquence. Concerning this desire of vain-glory, Paul says to the Galatians, 1. 10, Do I seek to please men? If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. A wholesome admonition to preachers is that direction of Prosper; Let them not in preaching place their confidence in splendid diction ; but in powerful effects. Let them not be gratified by the acclamations of the people, but by their tears: nor let them aim at eliciting applause, but sighs. De vita contempl. lib. i. cap. 23.

2. The faithfulness of a minister is apparent in this, that he not only advances his Master’s glory, but promotes with all his power, the benefit and safety of the people committed to him. This they do by watching over the flock; by distributing to them the food of their souls seasonably ; by dispensing milk to babes, and strong meat to the more advanced ; and, to sum up all in a word, by never . omitting, through indolence, to do or speak whatever may be necessary to the salvation of the people; nor to teach er do any thing, by any act of treachery, which may be hostile to their salvation. We have an illustrious specimen of this faithfulness in Paul, who, with a bold confidence, could declare concerning himself, I seek not mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved, J Cor. x. 33. But, to exhibit this faithfulness, it will be useful for every one constantly to propose to himself these three circumstances; Who? What? To whom?

Who he is, let him first of all carefully consider. He is not a private man, nor free, and master of himself; but an ambassador and servant of Christ : wherefore it behoves the pastor not to indulge in ease and pleasure, but to prosecute, with all diligence, the business laid upon him.

What he has undertaken to handle, he should next seriously think with himself; viz. the Word of God, and the Sacraments of Christ. Either to conceal the former, or in any manner to adulterate it, is a gross impiety; to cast the latter before dogs or swine, or deny them to the children, is the greatest sacrilege.

To whom all these things are to be administered, let him consider in the last place ;—To the sheep of Christ, to His brethren, to the children of God; to those whom Christ redeemed, not with silver and gold, but with his precious blood. He who shall lose even one poor soul of these by his unfaithfulness, it were better for him if a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea, Luke xvii. 2.

But here it may be asked, Why in extolling Epaphras, the Apostle should mention only his faithfulness, not his wisdom ; when each is required in the dispensation of the Divine word? as it is said in Matth. xxiv. 45, Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath uppointed over his household?

It is answered, First, because these two qualities are connected and joined with each other, so that true faithfulness cannot exist unless wisdom also be with it, which teaches and shews what is required from a faithful man: for wisdom is the eye of every virtue.

Secondly, that by the way he might check those new and false teachers in the church of the Colossians, who affected a shew of wisdom, whilst at the same time, they divested themselves of all regard for fidelity. He therefore calls Epaphras a faithful minister of Christ, that he might oppose him to those in whom an opinion of their own wisdom predominated, when, nevertheless, they were unfaithful towards Christ.

For you.] After the Apostle had recommended Epaphras on the ground of his vocation itself, that he was a minister of Christ; and on the ground of the character of his ministry, that he was a faithful minister; he now adds what greatly conduced to conciliate their love to him, for you, i. e. for your good, for your salvation.

From the design, therefore, and end of the ministry, he shews that honour is due to a minister from his flock: for Epaphras is not a minister of Christ for himself, but for others, viz. the Colossians.

It was a true dogma of the Philosopher (Aristot. Pol. 22), that there are two properties in every thing which excite the love and care of men, «0 diov, xài v0 &yamWrÓw, i.e. it ds their own, and it is beloved by them. Both of these are found in Epaphras ; 70 &yazwróv, worthy of love, for he was a minister of Christ, and moreover faithful; «0 3j, for he was peculiarly the minister of the Colossians. Hence arises a useful and necessary lesson, and which can never be sufficiently learnt by the laity.

Although a Christian people are bound to love and honour all ministers, yet each flock ought to cherish with especial love and honour those who are set over them in particular. So Paul, 1 Thess. v. 12, We beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you ; and to esteem them very highly in love for their works’ sake.

Whence it appears how defective and blamable is that affection in many who prefer to hear, and more love, any one rather than their own proper settled minister. If Paul had written to men of this sort concerning any one— Who I is a minister of Christ for you, he would have excited, not their love of him, but their contempt. These are they, who, having itching ears, heap to themselves teachers after their own lusts, as the Apostle writes 2 Tim. iv. 3.

So much for the commendation of Epaphras from his office, from his fidelity in the execution of it, and from the peculiar design thereof, viz. that he was appointed to the Colossians.

Verse 8.

Paul has commended the faith and love of the Colossians, when yet he was unknown to them by face, as appears from Ch. ii. 1 : Therefore some one might have asked, Whence, Paul, could you have this knowledge of us and of our affairs? He meets this question, and shews that he has not commended them rashly, but he had discovered and ascertained all by the relation of Epaphras, a most competent witness.

Who also declared.] He shews the author of the relation, which he does in order that he might gain favour for Epaphras among them : for it is natural to all to love those whom they have understood to think and speak honourably concerning them.

And here it is to be observed, how faithful a minister of Christ Epaphras was, not only in preaching the Gospel, but in exciting the minds of men to mutual love. For, as it is likely he had declared to the Colossians, how great an Apostle Paul was, with what admirable knowledge, with what singular zeal, he was distinguished; and thus excited in their minds an admiration and wondrous love of Paul; then he goes to Paul and explains how much affection there was in the Colossians towards him. This, then, is the duty of an ingenuous and pious man, to promote love and charity among all ; not to sow the seeds of hatred and strife.

Your love.] Here the Apostle touches upon the chief head of his relation: for he had said many good things to Paul concerning them, but had particularly extolled their love. Some refer this their love to all the saints ; but inasmuch as he had commended that in the fourth verse, the opinion of Chrysostom is the more probable, who refers it to the Apostle Paul; which also the following words seem to intimate.

In the Spirit, or, through the Spirit.] Two reasons are assigned by interpreters, why he states their love to be a the Spirit.

The first, a general one, which regards the very nature of love: to wit, because the Holy Spirit is the author of it; and also because love flows from a spiritual heart, i. e. from a heart regenerated and renewed.

Hence observe the dignity of Christian love. For natural love, or predilection, arises from those inclinations which they call oropyds guowds, natural affections. Worldly love arises either from views of interest or from conformity of manners; carnal, from the appetite for pleasure: To all these something corrupt, sordid, and vicious always adheres. But Christian love arises from the Holy Spirit, and is altogether full of holiness and purity.

The other reason why the love of the Colossians is said to be in the Spirit, is special, and hath respect to Paul himself; For, as we have before said, they had never seen Paul, but had only heard of him through Epaphras and others : because, therefore, they had loved him whom they never saw in the flesh, they are said to love in the spirit. Therefore the word spirit is taken in the same sense as in 1 Cor. v. 3, Being absent in the body, I am present with you in the spirit, &c.

Hence observe, that the duty of every good man is, to embrace with spiritual love all good men, although known ° only by report. That any one may be esteemed worthy of our love, it is sufficient if he be known in respect to his virtue, although he be unknown in person.

And thus far we have been employed in explaining the first and second part of the exordium. The last remains, which is comprised in the three following verses, 9, 10, 11.

Verses 9, 10, 11.

c.

In this verse and the two following is contained the last part of the exordium ; which consists of a prayer for the increase of spiritual blessings, of which the Colossians had been made partakers in some measure.

But the Apostle desires for them three kinds of blessings: the first, those which respect the perfect knowledge of the truth, ver. 9; The second, those which respect the exercise of godliness and purity, ver. 10; The last, those which respect patience and the enduring of the cross, ver. He

In this 9th verse, from which we must begin, we may observe three things :

The motive which excited Paul to this prayer, For this cause we also, &c.

The manner of the prayer itself, cease not to pray for you and to desire.

The sum of the prayer, that ye may be filled, &c. to the end.

Since the day we heard it.] Here he intimates the motive to his prayer, viz. the relation of Epaphras about their faith, love, &c. For these words refer to the whole narration concerning their faith in Christ, their love to the saints, their hope laid up in heaven, and also their love in particular towards the Apostle: for because so many good things had been told him of the Colossians, he ceased not from that day to pray for them, &c.

Observe 1. The best method of declaring our love and affection consists in this, that we pray for those whom we love, and desire these spiritual and salutary blessings for them from God. For to love, is to wish good to another not for our own, but for his sake; and truly to love is to wish real blessings to another; but real blessings are these spiritual ones, which render the possessors good. Hence, though the Apostle most tenderly loved all those to whom he sent his Epistles, yet we no where read that he sought honours or riches for them from God, but faith, love, holiness, patience, and other things of the like kind.

2. It ought especially to stir us up to pray for our brethren, when we perceive in them the first fruits of the Spirit and of renovation, and, as it were, the seeds of piety. For so Paul, because he understood the fundamentals of Religion to have been laid in the Colossians, on this very account, more earnestly sought from God the increase of the same graces. We may observe the like in his Epistle to the Ephesians, i. 15, 16, Having heard what faith and love is in you, I cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers, &c. Chrysostom illustrates this by an elegant similitude: As 24 the race, says he, we especially wish well to, and excite by our encouragement and our cheers, those who are not far from victory ; so in this race of the Christian life, we ought chiefly to favour and assist with our prayers those whom we perceive pressing with alacrity to the destined goal.⁸⁹—And so much concerning the motive.

We cease not to pray and desire for you.] The Apostle now expresses the manner of his praying, which is perceived in two things: in its importunity, we cease not ; in its fervid devotion, to pray and desire. freedom of speaking against reigning vices, and especially in declaiming against the gaiety, impiety, and corruption that prevailed at the Court of Arcadius, raised him many powerful enemies. Theophilus of Alexandria first obtained his deposition and banishment ; but so great was the tumult of the people, that the Emperor was compelled to send him letters of recal. Eudoxia, however, soon after had him banished again to a most inhospitable and barbarous place in Armenia. But there he gained such respect that the jealousy of his enemies was further excited, and an order was procured for his removal to a still worse station, the very shore of the Black Sea; when, ‘ as he was being removed, the soldiers (no doubt suitably instructed) treated him so roughly that he died by the way, A. D. 407, in the 60th year of his age. Chrysostom, if not so Evangelical in his views as some of the Fathers, yet confined himself more to the literal and historical sense of the divine word than others; and is justly ranked among the most eminent Christian orators: his eloquence was manly, and his fidelity as a minister of God’s word unbending; his genius was uncommon, and his erudition extensive. He exhibited himself both as a moral and controversial writer; composed a great number of homilies ; and his works were so abundant as to form thirteen folio volumes. His treatise on the Priesthood has been translated into English: and we are further indebted, if not to his own pen, yet to a Greek Liturgy commonly ascribed to him as the compiler, for that most excellent prayer at the close of our daily service, than which it would be difficult to conceive one more suitable to the conclusion of our prayers and supplications.

The Translator is informed, that in the service of the Greek Church as performed in Russia, no less than five prayers of St. Chrysostom are retained, of which the following is one; and, as a testimony of that Church’s holding the essentials to salvation, and as corresponding with the statements already given in this work of the doctrine of the sacred Trinity, the insertion of it in this place may not be deemed impertinent :

“ It is just and right to praise Thee, to magnify Thee, to worship Thee, in all places of thy dominion ; for thou art, O God, unspeakable, unknown, unseen, incomprehensible; Thou art the very same from eternity ; Thou and thine only Son, and thine Holy Ghost. Thou broughtest us out of nought into existence, and when we were fallen through our disobedience, thou liftedst us up again, in that thou didst every thing to bring us to heaven, and to give us an inheritance in thy kingdom which is to come. For these and all other benefits, known and unknown, seen or hidden, we give thanks to Thee, and thine only Son, and thine Holy Ghost. Accept our humble thanks that thou hast vouchsafed to receive this service at our hands: Thou who art surrounded with thousands of archangels, and ten

Importunity in prayer is commanded in Scripture; We ought always to pray, and not to faint ; Lukexviii. l. Pray without ceasing, 1 Thess. v. 17. The constant prayer of a righteous man availeth much, James v. 16.

But it may be said, How is it possible that Paul should never desist from prayer, when the weakness of human nature will not sustain continual praying ⁹⁰ nay, the Euchite, or Messaliani, who made constant prayer the pretext of indolence and sluggishness, are reckoned among heretics. Theodor. lib. 4. Augustine, tom. vi. De heres.

I answer, We are said not to cease from prayer, or not to leave off praying for any thing, when we have a fixed desire of that thing in our heart. So Augustine, in Psalm xxxvii. Thy desire is thy prayer ; if there be a continual desire, there is continual prayer.

Secondly, we are said not to faint, or not to cease from praying, when we exercise it in its proper time and place. For it is idleness in a man, and he ceases from his work, which he does not perform when he can and ought.

In either respect, therefore, Paul said truly, We cease not to pray for you. For there was both a perpetual desire in his mind (at least as to the habit) of promoting their good ; and that also, as much as in him lay, he did promote by : his prayers, as often as opportunity of praying offered itself to him.

Observe, then, the duty of the pastor is not only to teach his flock, and to commend them to God in public prayers, but also in his private prayer he ought never to be unmindful of the people committed to his care. Thus Samuel was actuated towards the people of God, Be it far from me to sin against the Lord in ceasing to pray for you ; ] Sam. xii. 23. So our Apostle, God is my witness, whom I serve, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers, &c. Rom. i. 9.

Neither let any one here object, that men of remarkable holiness, such as were Samuel and Paul, might help the people of God by their constant prayers; but that other ministers who are destitute of this holiness, cannot: For well hath Augustine taught, that even wicked priests are heard when they pray for their flocks, although they are not heard when they pray for themselves, contra Epist. Parmen. lib. ii. cap 8. And so much concerning the importunity of the Apostle’s prayer: What follows is concerning its vehement devotion.

To pray and to desire.] In these two words the Apostle intimates the devotion and even the vehemency of his prayer for the Colossians. Some by the word ergoetuxóusvo,, understand the desire of the mind ; by that other, àrróuutvoi, the expressed petition of the lips. But here, by ergorsux», I not only understand the internal elevation of the mind, but that part of prayer which especially paves the way for our petitions, in which we adore and glorify God, commemorating his majesty and goodness, and those other attributes which excite love and devotion in the minds of those who pray. But afrnois, is the petition itself of the things desired, which follows this wgozsuxs, or devout direction of the mind and of the prayer to God. When, therefore, the Apostle says that he prayed, zpoceuxecSa:, for the Colossians, he seems to me to intimate that he commended them to God, whenever he felt his mind at all devoutly inflamed towards God: indeed, the prayer of a mind kindled and inflamed is most efficacious, so as to penetrate the very heavens. But when he says that he desired, direto3a, for them, he signifies the vehemence of his petition: for “aitnois, desire, is the entreating for necessary things. He therefore so prayed to God for the spiritual progress of the Colossians, as men are wont to intreat others for the things which they greatly need.

Observe 1. Devotion and a pious affection towards God ought always to open the way to our particular petitions, whether we seek necessary things for ourselves or for others. For he who rashly, and without regard to the Divine Majesty, dares to launch forth to make any petition, provokes God to indignation, not to beneficence.

2. “We should seek benefits from God, not coldly, neither for form’s sake; but we ought to be actuated by a clear perception and an earnest desire of those things which we seek from God. For he who requires that with his mouth which he disregards with his heart, does not pray to God, but mocks him.

We have explained the cause, and the mode of the Apostle’s prayer; it now remains that we consider the sum of the petition itself, comprehended in the words immediately following :

That ye may be filled with the knowledge of his will, in all wisdom and spiritual uuderstanding.] Now the Apostle begins to unfold the sum of his prayer. And here two things are to be noted: the quantity of the blessings sought, and their quality.

That ye may be filled.] The Apostle has before shewn that the Colossians were endowed with faith, hope, and love, and all other spiritual gifts; but now he asks something greater from God, viz. that they may be filled with the : same.

It may be said, we are not able to obtain full and perfect knowledge, or love, or holiness, whilst we carry about this mortal body. For so the Apostle, 1 Cor. xiii. 9, We know in part, and we prophecy in part, &c. Why, then, does the Apostle pray that they may be filled with knowledge, which he himself knew could not be attained ?

I answer, there is a twofold plenitude of knowledge and of every grace : a plenitude for the inheritance, and a plenitude for the way. The plenitude of the inheritance is the greatest measure of grace which the mind of every one is able to contain: this is not to be had before we are introduced to the state of glory. But the plenitude of the way is the greatest measure of grace which God has determined to impart to every one of the elect in this world : and this is had by all the elect before they remove from this life.

1 2 Concerning this the Apostle speaks, Ephes. iv. 7, To every one of you is given grace, according to the measure of the gift of Christ. And Augustine, in Psalm xxxviii. There is a certain perfection, according to the measure of this life; and it belongs to that perfection, that each knows that he is not yet perfect. This perfection and plenitude of grace the Apostle desires for the Colossians in this prayer.

Hence we are taught that we ought never to think that we have attained the fulness of any grace destined for us in this life; but we ought always to strive and to seek from God, that we may be filled more and more with all spiritual gifts.

We are, whilst we live here, as children who are not yet arrived at maturity : whence the holy Scriptures excite all to a constant advance in every gift of divine grace. Lest I should be tedious, I will only note the places, I will not recite them. To the increase of faith, 2 Cor. x. 15: of hope, Rom. xv. 13: of love, Ephes. iv. 15: of knowledge, Ephes. iii. 19: of all grace, 2 Pet. iii. 18. Many passages from the Fathers might be adduced for this opinion. Nazianzen, for instance, says, A Christian either advances or falls back ; he cannot remain in the same state. Bernard says, He is by no means good who does not wish to be better; and where you begin to be unwilling to become better, there you leave off to be good.⁹¹

We must therefore always seek and labour that we may be filled more and more with spiritual gifts.

Thus much as to the quantity.

The knowledge of his will.] In these words and the following the Apostle explains what are those blessings which he desires for the Colossians, and of what kind. Adundant knowledge is one blessing, ex:yvwors, i. e. knowledge upon knowledge: a cumulation and fulness of knowledge. But of what kind? Not any whatever, but that which is here described by its object and its cause, viz. the knowledge of the divine will flowing from wisdom and spiritual understanding. The knowledge of the divine will denotes the act with the object: Wisdom and understanding mark the habits infused, whence this actual and efficacious knowledge flows. As to the object of this knowledge, we must know that the divine will, in itself, is of infinite consideration, and inscrutable to men: This knowledge, therefore, must be limited and restricted to the revealed will; for knowledge (agnitiv) presupposes a manifestation of the thing to be known.

But now, this revealed will, the full knowledge of which the Apostle seeks for the Colossians, is referred to two kinds: a knowledge of the things to be believed, and of , those to be done; or of faith, and new obedience. With respect to faith, This is the will of God, that every one who seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life, John vi. 40. As to holiness and obedience, This is the will of God, even your sanctification, that every one should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour, 1 Thess. iv. 3, 4. The knowledge, therefore, of the divine will embraces in itself the knowledge of the Law and of the Gospel: of the Law, which shews us the abyss of our misery, and also proposes to the regenerate a rule of new life; of the Gospel, which opens to us the depths of divine mercy, and also teaches the method of obtaining salvation. Neither is the bare apprehension of these things called the knowledge of the divine will, but the efficacious apprehension which applies Christ to ourselves, and expresses the rule of the law in our life and actions, as far as in us lies. Hereby we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments, 1 John 11.3; the commandments as well concerning faith as obedience.⁹²

Ye see the object of this knowledge : now let us proceed to the cause or fountain of it.

In all wisdom and spiritual understanding.] The Apostle shews whence that efficacious knowledge of the divine will arises, or in what it is grounded, viz. in wisdom and spiritual understanding. What is expressed in the Greek by svzogia, some render per sapientiam ; others cum sapient but it comes to the same thing; for all understand that that knowledge of the divine will is not from us, neither by human learning, but by infused wisdom.*

Let us, therefore, inquire into two things: What is wisdom and understanding ? and whence derived ?

Lombard, and after him, all the Schoolmen have indulged in many speculations respecting these points, where they dispute about the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit: the ground of which disputation is sought from Isa. xi. 2, where, however, only six are enumerated. But, omitting ‘ all other, let us enquire what is their opinion of these two gifts.

Wisdom, says Lombard, quoting the passage above-mentioned, is a habit infused for the contemplation of, and delight an, eternal truth alone ; understanding, for the consideration of the Creator and invisible creatures.⁹³⁹⁴

Parisiensis says, that the gift of wisdom is opposed to childishness ; and the proper office of this is to produce in the mind a contempt of vain and temporal things, and to cause it to take knowledge of such as are heavenly, and to embrace them with delight : but the gift of understanding is opposed to stupidity ; and its property is to penetrate the secrets of things and their signs; to see clearly into what are veiled in mysteries, or shadowed forth in any manner ; not to cleave to, or be deceived by the external appearances of things. It is therefore, as it were, the acute and polished light of wisdom itself, and without some measure of this gift, he says, no one can attain unto salvation.

Altissiodorensis says, Wisdom is the knowledge of God absolute‘y, understanding is the knowledge of God relatively, viz. in reference to the creatures. He adds, that wisdom is the knowledge of God by spiritual taste, because by means of wisdom, the graciousness of God is tasted.

Gerson says, That understanding is a certain spiritual light, infused into creatures for the knowledge of God; that wisdom is a light infused, under, or by which, divine things are perceived experimentally.

But these descriptions of the Schoolmen do not seem to me sufficiently ample: for they restrict, as well wisdom as . understanding, to a contemplative life ; whereas both equally regard an active one.⁹⁵

Wisdom, then, is the infused knowledge of those things which pertain to faith and a good life, with pious affections inclining to the application and practice of the same.

For spiritual wisdom consists not of the illumination of the intellect alone, neither of the renovation of the affections alone, but of both conjointly. Which may be proved from many testimonies of Scripture: The fear of the Lord is wisdom ; and to depart from evil is understanding, Job xxviii. 28. Whoso keepeth the law is a wise son, Prov. xxvii.7. From which and similar places, it is manifest, that this wisdom, although as to its essence it is a certain perfection of the intellect, yet as to its matter and use, is also practical and moral. Wisdom, therefore, is not only the light of the soul, but a certain healthiness and perfection of it. The light of mere knowledge is sometimes communicated to the wicked ; for many know the will of God, but they do it not, nay, they plainly hate it: but the light of wisdom always renders a man pious, because it at once inclines the will to that good which is apprehended by the intellect. Such wisdom Paul supplicates for the Colossians.

As to what pertains to the understanding or intellect, cuveciy, I do not think it to be a gift in reality distinct from the afore-mentioned wisdom ; but to be a more eminent degree; and, as it were, the pinnacle of wisdom. It is, therefore, a certain ripeness of wisdom, by which any one is fitted to judge of truth and falsehood, good and evil, when they are involved in some special difficulty, from particular circumstances. Hence the disciples of the Saviour are said to be ’acvvera, without understanding, Matth. xv. 16, because they understood not the doctrine of Christ clothed in parables. And Paul wished for Timothy, an understanding in all things, 2 Tim. ii. 7.—But we shall render these points more plain by adducing examples; and first in things to be believed, then in things to be done.

Let a question be proposed, Whether the only Mediator of God and men be the man Christ Jesus; every one endued with the gift of divine wisdom will immediately affirm that he is. Now let it be involved in special difficulties, Whether he is so our only Mediator, that he has not communicated the office of interceding to his glorious mother and to other saints; or whether he is so our Mediator, that he alone hath made satisfaction for our sins, having left no part of the satisfaction to be made by us. Now there will be need of understanding, i. e. of the clearness of wisdom, which, if wanting, we shall easily fall into error.

Let it be also enquired, Whether it is lawful for subjects to bear arms against their Sovereign; even every Papist will immediately answer it is not lawful. Now let particular circumstances be added: Is it lawful by force of arms to oppose their king when condemned for heresy, and excommunicated by the order of the Pope? If the gift of understanding be wanting, every Papist will doubt and vacillate; nay, he will break out into open rebellion, as we have seen testified by experience.—You perceive what wisdom is, what understanding, and what is their difference.

Now, in the last place, is it asked Whence these gifts come to us? The Apostle points out that in one word, d when he adds spiritual.

Spiritual.] But it is called so, because it is produced by the Spirit of Christ, not acquired by our ability. For the uncreated Wisdom of God, is the Author of this created wisdom.* In Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, and the rest of the heathen writers, that wisdom in which they excelled was an acquired habit; but in the faithful, saving wisdom is an infused habit. If any lack wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth to all men liberally, Jas.i. 5. Whence says Clemens, Wisdom cannot be bought with earthly coin; nor is it sold in the market, but in heaven, Pedag, lib. ii. cap. 3.

From these considerations we deduce some inferences.⁹⁶

1. Whereas the Apostle intreats a full knowledge of the divine will for the Colossians, we gather that a blind ignorance, however devoted, is not pleasing to God. For that is not good which is not rationally good ; as Tertullian intelligently remarks against Mare. lib. 1.

2. Whereas he wishes wisdom and understanding for the Colossians, we learn that that trust in the faith of their prelates, which the advocates of Popery every where extol, is not sufficient for the people; for he who hath wisdom and understanding, sees with his own eyes. not the eyes of others.

3. They are led not by an Apostolic, but an anti-Christian spirit, who deny to the people the ordinary means of obtaining wisdom and spiritual understanding, viz. the reading and understanding of the divine word: For the law of the Lord is undefiled, converting the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple, Ps. xix.

And thus much concerning the first part of the Apostle’s prayer, for those good things which regard the perfect knowledge of the truth.

Verse 10.

We have dismissed the first part of the Apostle’s prayer, where he seeks for the Colossians those good things which conduce to the perfect knowledge of the truth. Now I come to the second, where he earnestly desires for them the perfect exercise of piety and holiness.

And, in the first place, it may be observed, from the order itself of this prayer, That wisdom and spiritual understanding are poured into the minds of men from God, not for barren knowledge and idle speculation, but for the practice and exercise of holiness.

The Apostle in the verse before us does two things: He proposes, in general, the sum of this his desire, That ye might walk worthy of the Lord. Then he draws it out into parts, and explains how we may walk worthy of God: First, as to the intention and scope, if we refer all things &ig “apéoxeiay, to the pleasing of God; secondly, as to the twofold operation, if we be fruitful in works, and increase in the knowledge of God.

That ye might walk worthy of the Lord.] To walk is an Hebrew phrase, often put in the Scriptures for beginning and keeping to a course of life: as to walk deceitfully, and with simplicity, in many passages of the Proverbs of Solomon; and to walk in the ways and in the statutes of God, as is frequent with David in the Psalms. So in the New Testament, to walk according to the flesh, and according to the Spirit, i. e. to live and to converse. By this form of speaking, we are admonished that Christianity consists in a perpetual journey towards the celestial country, and that no one must halt by the way, but must perpetually walk and go forward. But how is he to walk ?

Worthy of the Lord.] What these words mean we shall readily understand, if we compare them with similar forms of speaking, which occur elsewhere in this our Apostle; so 7 Ephes. iv. 1, I pray that ye walk worthy of the vocation. Phil. i. 27, he exhorts them to conduct themselves worthy of God. He walks worthy of the Lord, therefore, who so lives as becomes him who is called by the Gospel to the adoption of the sons of God, and to the lively hope of the inheritance of heaven.

Here some may ask, How is it possible to walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, or of God, or of the Gospel, or of our vocation; since nothing adequately corresponds to the high excellency of all these things, except perfect and immaculate righteousness and holiness, such as is not found in men who retain this body of sin?

I answer, the word worthy, in the Scriptures, does not always denote the exact proportion of equality of one thing to another, but a certain accordance or suitableness, which takes away repugnance, though it does not establish absolute condignity. So Matth. iii. 8, Bring forth fruits WORTHY of repentance, i. e. according with and befitting, not repugnant to the repentance which ye profess. He, therefore, walks worthy of God who flees from the baseness and folly of carnal men, who carries himself as a faithful soul, loving God and his brethren, although he often slides and sins through infirmity. For this our worthiness does not depend upon our absolute perfection, but upon the gratuitous condescension of God, who accounts, as worthy his favour, those who follow the guidance of his spirit; and those unworthy who yield themselves slaves to the flesh and sin.

Hence is to be noted,

]l. The infinite goodness and compassion of God, who accounts us children, worthy of adoption and of the heavenly inheritance, although we are very far from perfect holiness; provided we walk not in the counsel of the ungodly, and stand not in the way of sinners, and sit not in the seat of the scornful; but delight in his law, and meditate therein continually, Ps. 1.

2. Hence also appears the pride of those who, from this divine loving-mercy, attempt to establish the merit of condignity ; as though to walk worthy of God was to merit heavenly felicity by their works. But the Apostle dreamt no such thing ; only he would have them strive after holiness, that it might thence appear they did not receive the knowledge and the grace of God in vain.—And this is the sum of his desire in general.

Unto all pleasing, or compliance ; or That ye may please in all things.] What the Apostle had proposed in general, he now begins to explain particularly ; and first he shews how we may walk worthy of God, as to the intention and universal scope of our life ; if, forsooth, all our actions have reference to pleasing God.

Therefore the word dpécxeiav, pleasing, I think is to be taken, in this place, not so much for the result of pleasing, as for the desire and intention of pleasing. For so the word itself is often used: Rom. xv. 2, Let every one of you please his neighbour. And Gal. i. 10, If I pleased men I should not be the servant of God.

But as the Apostle adds a note of universality, that ye may please in ALL things, so the Greek Scholia explain it by distribution into aoyom, epyois, xeu doyuact, words, works, (as well internal as external) and also doctrines.

The reason why the Apostle emphatically requires this general intention of pleasing God, is this; Because the end determines the quality in moral things, as the form does in natural things. Our duties are to be judged of, not by the beginning but by the end, says August. in Ps. cxviii. And, lib. iv. contr. Julian, cap. 3, Whatever good is done, ‘and is done not on this account, because it ought to be done, although it seems good in the view of its being a matter of duty, yet the end itself t.ot being right, it is sin. So Clem. Strom. 6. The action of erery heathen is foul, because he has not the right end in view. The scope therefore of our whole life ought to be this, that we may please God, and may glorify him thereby.

But here, in regard to the intention of pleasing God, it behoves us to resolve some doubts.

It is asked, 1. Whether in every good work, the actual intention of pleasiag God be necessary through the whole ! course of the work? For instance; A dutiful son obeys his parents with the intention of pleasing God; I ask, whether he sins in any particular instance of duty, if he should not always actually keep this intention in mind ?

I answer; It suffices if that intention should have preceded, and be habitually retained, although it be not thought upon in every single act : for many operations proceed by virtue of some primary intention, although the actual intention hath ceased to accompany them. As a dart, by the single impulse of him who throws it, is borne through an intermediate space to a point, although he thinks not either of the space or the point ; so a good work proceeds from a single impulse of the will to its mark, when the performer no longer actually thinks of the mark and of his first intention, The same may be illustrated by the similitude of a traveller, who does not actually, every step he goes, think of that place whither he is going, and yet proceeds straight thither, by virtue of his primary intention.

But here we should be admonished of two things: First, that we must endeavour, as much as possible, to retain the actual intention of pleasing and of glorifying God in each particular work. Secondly, we must take care, lest, after the first good intention, some bad and inordinate intention insinuate itself: for this latter does not derive rectitude from the former; but the former will by this latter be marred, corrupted, and defiled.

2. Itisasked, Whether it be possible for a regenerated man always to retain this habitual intention of pleasing God in all things, although in the mean time he fails in many ?

I answer ; That not only is it possible, but necessary, if he wishes to retain faith and a good conscience: for these cannot consist, neither remain in the same heart with the design of sinning and of displeasing God. Therefore every believer constantly keeps in mind the purpose of pleasing God and of abstaining from sin, according to that saying of Paul, The good that I would I do not ; but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if 7 do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me, Rom. vii. 19. He who chooseth good, and not evil, retains the design of pleasing God, although, being allured by evil concupiscence, he sometimes does that through infirmity which displeases God, he makes it his main business to please in all things, whilst he studies to avoid every single sin.

Lastly, it is asked, Whether a believer retaining this design of pleasing God, is always acceptable and pleasing to him, notwithstanding those his failures and infirmities?

I answer, first, That the person of a godly and faithful man is always pleasing and acceptable to God, because he is regarded by God not as he is in himself, but as a member under Christ the head; But there is no condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus, Rom. viii. 1. Secondly, The good works of the faithful, although imperfect, are nevertheless pleasing to God, because they are regarded by him as by a loving Father, not as an austere judge ; as covered and adorned with the most perfect obedience of Christ, not as naked and alone. Lastly, The failings and sins of the faithful are indeed hateful and displeasing to God, but out of a simple hatred, not redounding upon the person.⁹⁷ And therefore God hates sin in the regenerate, and for that reason declares war against it, through the Spirit of grace; but the regenerate themselves, in the mean time, are acceptable to him, and on that account he favours and blesses them. And so much concerning the intention of those who walk worthy of the Lord. We must proceed to the working.

Being fruitful in every good work, and increasing, &c.] Good working ought to follow a good intention, if we wish to walk worthy of God. and to please him. But he names two kinds of working: the first is practical working, which tends to labour: the other is theoretical working, which labours for the acquisition of knowledge itself. In the first, two things are to be observed: What he requires, fruitfulness ; What is the matter about which this fruitfulness is exercised, Every good work.

Fruitful.] This is a metaphorical expression taken from a tree; not every tree, but one bearing fruit. For the godly are compared to trees planted by the rivers of waters, l which bring forth fruit in their season, Psal. i. They are compared to branches grafted in the fruitful vine: Jam the vine, ye are the branches: he who abideth in me bringeth forth much fruit, John xv. 5. From this comparison three things may be noted :

1. As no tree can bear fruit, unless it hath a certain life-giving seed in itself, and is moreover nourished daily with good sap; so no one can bear spiritual fruit, unless he hath in himself the seed of the Spirit, and is daily watered with the outpourings of divine grace. Without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered. Hence it is said, 1 John iii. 9, Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him : and he cannot sin because he is born of God. The Holy Spirit is called seed, because by his power, as a certain life-giving seed, men are rendered fruitful in good works. Not much unlike this similitude is that of Parisiensis, when he says, that virtues are called fruits, because the mind of the regenerate man is like a field sowed with the lifegiving seed of the word of God; which conceives and brings forth all kinds of virtues, from the gratuitous and spiritual embrace of its eternal Spouse, i. e. God.

2. As that tree is pleasing to God, which does not occupy the ground in vain, neither dissipates the moisture which it draws on leaves and blossoms alone; but produces good fruits: so he alone is pleasing to God, who does not uselessly occupy room in the Church, neither wears the appearance and form of godliness alone, but puts forth its power and virtue by fruitfulness. Very remarkable are the places of Scripture on this point: in Luke xiii. 7, the Lord says concerning the fig-tree, I seek fruit and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? On the other hand, a fruitful tree is pleasing to its Lord, and is customarily his care and delight: My Father is the husbandman: every branch which beareth fruit he purgeth it that it may bring forth more fruit, John xv 2.

I therefore say with Nazianzen, Let no Christian be indolent or unfruitful, but let every one from the things which he hath bring forth fruit to God : the sinner, penitence; he who runs well, perseverance; the youth, chastity ; the old man, prudence; the rich, mercy ; the poor, thankfulness, &c.⁹⁸

3. As a tree lives and bears fruit, not for itself, but for the owner, and for others to whom he sees fit to impart of its fruits; so a godly man ought not to live to himself alone, nor to care only that his life be honourable to himself, but that it may be especially honourable to God, who is his Lord, and beneficial to all his brethren ; for this is to resemble a fruitful tree.—And thus much concerning the fruitfulness required: It remains to speak of the matter of this fruitfulness.

In every good work.] Behold the very broad and spacious matter in which the fruitfulness of a godly man is exercised : Ànd truly in this he differs from a tree: For no person seeks different fruits from one and the same tree; but God expects that every one of the faithful and regenerate should produce every kind of good works. And the reason of this dissimilitude arises from this circumstance, that since the fruit of any thing answers to its seed, a tree produces only one sort of fruit, inasmuch as the virtue and power of the seed planted is limited to one; but the seed which is sown in the hearts of the pious (viz. the Grace of the Holy Spirit) avails to the producing equally of every spiritual fruit: Unless, therefore, they had baptised, to supplant him in the See: Supported by the Emperor Theodosius, he defeated his opponent, and his election was confirmed in the Council of Constantinople, held in 381. ‘The difficulties. of his situation, however, induced him shortly after to resign it ; when he retired to his paternal estate at Nazianzum, and there lived in seclusion till 389, the period of his decease. He was not only a man of piety, learning, and talent; but also in other respects an estimable character, displaying on most occasions more moderation and liberality than was usual among the Divines of his age. As a Divine he so far outstripped the rest of his day, that “ he was “ entitled ’o beoadyos wat’ ’eoxnv; and a difference from his doctrine was * identified with Heresy. A dutiful son, a faithful friend, and universally “ beneficent, he would have been a model for society, had he not been too * sensitive, and, perhaps, too ascetic. Humble, though full of energy ; * despising worldly advantages unless he could apply them to the advance- * ment of Religion ; untainted by immorality, forgiving injuries, and in- “ defatigable in his Ministry, he may be accounted the most exemplary, “ as well as the most able Christian on record in the fourth century.” Vide Encyclop. Metropol. under Ecclesiastical Writers of the fourth Century. His works are extant in 2 vols. printed at Paris in 1609. His style is said to be equal to that of the most celebrated orators of ancient Greece. produce every fruit, they do not answer the nature and efficacy of the seed. For the fruit of the Spirit is not one alone, but manifold; viz. love, joy, peace, patience, longsuffering, goodness, benignity, and the like ; Gal. v.22. There are, therefore, two things to be noted in the matter of the fruitfulness :

The first, that God does not approve of every kind of fruitfulness, but restricts it to good works. But those are called good works which are commanded and directed by God. They, therefore, who by their own inventions, and a certain superstition, “ebexobpnoxe‘a, a will-worship, attempt to please God, are judged not to grow fruitful, but wanton. For so speaks the Psalmist, cvi. 39, They were defiled with their own works, and went a whoring with their own inventions. Wisely and piously spake Cyprian, The exercises of righteousness are to be chosen not by our own will, but by the will of God, De singul. cleric. And in Isaiah God complains of the Jews, that they worshipped him by the precepts of men, ch. xxix. 13.

The second, that fruitfulness of any one kind is not sufficient, but we must be fruitful in every good work. If any one produce the good fruit of alms deeds, and mingle with them the impure fruits of lewdness ; or if any one be conspicuous for chastity, and defile himself by avarice; he would not answer the divine will, or the Apostle’s desire of being fruitful in every good work : nay, he is accounted by God bad and unclean. For who shall say that any one is clean, who is wont to wallow even in a single sewer ? Hence the Apostle bids us abstain from all appearance of evil, and wishes us to be sanctified wholly ¢aoteasis, wishes spirit, soul, and body to be preserved blameless, 1 Thess. v. 22, 23.

And so much concerning that practical working whereby we please God.

Increasing in the knowledge of God.] This is that other working of those who walk worthy of God, and study to please him. As they are fruitful in good works as far as respects an active life, so they increase and advance in the knowledge of God as far as respects a contemplative life. The Apostle alludes to that increase in our spiritual stature, concerning which he also speaks in Ephes. iv. 13, where he shews, that we must increase tild we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ. —We observe,

1. Increase in knowledge is no less necessary to a Christian man, than fruitfulness in works ; because we are bound to both by the divine command, and we are taught to seek both from God by Apostolic example.

2. From the circumstance of the Apostle joining these two, he wishes to intimate that fruitfulness in works cannot exist, without this progress in wisdom ; nor progress in wisdom and the true knowledge of God, without fruitfulness. ‘

The reason of the former is this; Because wisdom so directs the operation of virtue, as sight does the walking faculty. Take away sight, and no one can walk aright ; take away wisdom, and he cannot be fruitful as he ought. For that action is bad which is not directed by knowledge, although it belong to the class of the good.⁹⁹ And the reason of the latter is, because the desire and the practice of holiness is, by the divine ceconomy, a certain preparation l for obtaining more abundant knowledge from God ; and on the other hand, the neglect of holiness and good works, is the cause why God inflicts spiritual blindness, and gives men over to a reprobate mind. J understand more than the ancients, because I keep thy precepts, Ps. cxix. 100. Into a malicious soul wisdom shall not enter ; nor dwell in the body which is subject unto sin. Wisdom i. 4: And Rom. i. 21, 28, Because when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, their foolish heart was darkened, and God delivered them over to a reprobate mind. As therefore from true knowledge, arises the study of holiness and the practice of good works; so again from this fruitfulness knowledge itself takes a new increase: as also from ignorance arises an abandoned life; so again, from this abandoned life, ignorance and spiritual stupidity is increased.—But let it suffice to have said thus much concerning the second part of the Apostle’s prayer.

Verse 11.

This is the last part of the Apostle’s prayer for the Colossians, and has especial respect to the enduring of the cross. And there are three things to be noted in it:

1. The good itself which is sought, strengthening ; being strengthened with all might.

2. Whence this good is expected and obtained: from the glorious power of God.

3. To what end this good of being strengthened subserves; unto all patience and long-suffering with joyfulness.

Strengthened with all might.] These words are connected with the 9th verse; We cease not to pray for you, that ye may be filled with all knowledge, &c. that ye may walk worthy of the Lord… . being strengthened with all might, &c.

This strengthening fortifies the mind as well to endure as to abstain; for it impresses that fortitude on the mind, which, as Prosper says, not only being beaten by divers troubles remains unshaken, but also yields, through being enfeebled, to no allurements of pleasure, De vita contemplat. iii. 20. It is most properly, therefore, the business of this strengthening to invest a man with that spiritual power, by which he may act virtuously and live religiously, notwithstanding those difficulties and dangers which restrain him from godliness.

The School doctors affirm somewhat more explicitly that this might exercises its energies in five things ;

1. In attempting good works, however arduous. 2. In striving against vices. 3. In despising earthly things. 4. In resisting temptations. 5. In enduring afflictions. And here it is proper to observe the order of the Apostle’s prayer. He entreated for them, in the first place, an infused knowledge of the divine will; secondly, fruitfudness in works of holiness: now, lastly, he desires for them might, from some special strengthening, because the cross awaits all those who will live godly in Christ, 2 Tim. iii. 12.

Observe ; Even after a knowledge of the truth is infused, and the grace of holiness imparted, yet the regenerate remain infirm and weak to undertake any spiritual good, to strive against vices, to resist temptations ; unless they are further strengthened and sustained. This Paul confesses, To will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I find not, Rom. vii. 18. This was manifested in David and Peter, who, by reason of this infirmity of our nature, fell in the day of temptation.

This infirmity of the regenerate and sanctified man, Parisiensis illustrates by some beautiful similitudes in his book of Temptations and the means of resisting them; of which it will not be foreign to our undertaking to adduce a few, that it may be understood what wisdom the Apostle evinced in desiring strengthening also for them after sanctification.

1. He compares the regenerate and sanctified man to a knight splendidly armed, who proceeds to battle mounted upon : a prancing and refractory horse : for he is often thrown by the movements of his steed, unless some other person come to his as sistance : so the regenerate man, having in himself a. concupiscence resisting and fighting against the Spirit, will ofttimes be thrown to the earth, unless he be supported and strengthened from another quarter.

2. He compares the regenerate and godly man to a building, the upper part of which consists of firm and solid materials, the lower is dry and combustible: for so the renewed man, as to his regenerated part, viz. his spirit, consists as it were of endowments and graces that are divine, which possess in themselves stability ; but as to his inferior part, viz. the flesh, he consists of lusts and evil inclinations: as therefore that building, so the renewed man, being easily inflamed in the inferior part, will be wholly destroyed, unless he be protected and succoured from some other quarter.

9. As a Virgin, although she be adorned with remarkable chastity and modesty, yet if she pass her life in the midst of corruptors, will need assistance lest she be overcome by their blandishments or threats; so the human soul adorned with grace and holiness, nevertheless requires constant strengthening, because it exists among corrupting men and evil. spirits, and also inbred lusts.

Ye see the necessity of strengthening on account of the infirmity of the flesh. But why does the Apostle say, strengthened with ari might?

First, to intimate that we fight not against one enemy, neither are opposed by weapons on one side only, but by many, and on every side. There are three chief adversaries, the flesh, the world, the devil; under each of which, as leaders, there are innumerable bands of troops. Secondly, to signify that it profits us little, if we conquer any one or some of these enemies, unless we bravely tread them all under our feet. For, as Cyprian speaks, if avarice be overthrown, lust rises ; if lust be subdued, ambition succeeds ; af ambition is spurned, wrath incenses, pride inflates, &c. Unless we overcome these enemies one and all, we are conquered : There is therefore need of all might against every kind of enemy.—Thus much concerning the good which is sought.

According to his glorious power, Karà «0 upéros ms d0éns autov.} This is an Hebraism ; for the genitive case of the substantive is put instead of an adjective, vim gloria, i. e. vim gloriosam, the power of God for glorious power. Now in these words the Apostle shews whence the strengthening and might of the godly comes, namely, from the glorious power of God. Three things are to be considered : What this strengthening power is; Why it is called glorious power; How it comes to us, and whence it is derived. As to the first: The strengthening power is the Holy Spirit himself, with his gifts; who breathes wonderful might into our infirm minds. For so Christ himself speaks, Luke xxiv. 49, Tarry ye, said he to the Apostles, in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high ; i. e. until the Holy Spirit enter into you from heaven: For so Paul when writing to the Ephes. iii. 16, May God grant you, that ye may be strengthened mightily by his Spirit in the inner man.

We are here taught

1. That no one ought to confide in his own strength, as though by his own power he could resist temptations, or endure griefs and afflictions for Christ ; but he should seek strengthening from this Spirit. — Piously and wisely spake Augustine, A presumption of stability keeps back many from stability : no one will be strong by God, but he who perceives his weakness in himself, De verbis Domini. serm. 13.

2. That when temptations are overcome, it behoves us to ascribe the glory to God, not to ourselves, or to our own power. Not unto us, not unto us, but to thy name give the glory, Ps. cxv. 1. For it is a species of pride when any one would seem to have that from himself which he borrowed from another.

Lastly, when we see heretical and impious men confidently undergoing pains and torments, we must know, that it is not might, but madness; not strength, but stupidity : for true courage is the gift of the Holy Spirit, and is given to the sanctified alone. For the things which seem to be done by heretics and the wicked with a certain fortitude, , argue not so much their strength, as the violent impulses of the devil: for the deeds of heretics are as the deeds of demoniacs, as says Parisiensis, De moribus.

Thus it appears whence this strengthening might comes. Let us enquire why it is called glorious.

Glorious.] The Apostle could have said, we are strengthened by God, or by his power; but he adds this epithet, glorious power, or glorious might ;

1. That we may place the greater confidence in this divine power: Because this very word contains in itself an earnest, or rather a promise of victory and triumph: for this could not be glorious power, if it might be overcome by an evil spirit and sin. In all. these things we are more than conquerors through him who hath loved us, Rom viii. 37.

2. It is called glorious power on account of the admirable mode of conquering the devil, the world, and the flesh. For the Spirit of God not immediately, by his absolute power, beats off these enemies of our salvation ; but by inspiring us with strength causes even ourselves to trample them under. Moreover that power must necessarily be very admirable and glorious, which makes feeble man, clothed with sinful flesh, to overcome the insults and wiles of devils, the alarms and solicitations of the flesh, the hatred, snares, and injuries of the whole world. Of this glorious power God himself speaks, My strength is made perfect in weakness, 2 Cor. xii. 9. Vide 1 Cor. i. 27.

Only one thing now remains to be explained: How this glorious power of the Holy Spirit comes to us. It is derived unto us by the gracious mediation and intercession of Christ sitting at the right hand of the Father. Concerning the gift or sending of his Spirit into the hearts of believers, we have the promise of Christ, John xvi.7, it is expedient for you that I go away, for, if I go away, I will send the Comforter unto you. Christ, therefore, as God, together with the Father and the Holy Spirit, gives this glorious power of the Holy Spirit to his people. God alone gives God. Christ, as man, intercedes with the Father, and by his intercession obtains this Spirit of fortitude for all the elect: John xiv. 16, I will ask the Father, and he will ] give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever. :

Hence we gather that Christ, although seated in heaven, is yet the living head of, and really united to, the Church which is on earth. For as the natural head diffuses sense and motion through its body ; so Christ, the spiritual head of the Church, communicates the vital power of his Spirit to all his members.

Here we see the real practical use of that article, He sitteth at the right hand of the Father: For we do not believe as we ought the sitting of Christ at the right hand of the Father, unless we believe that he so reigns in heaven, as far more effectually to protect and strengthen his people by this his glorious power, than if he continued to be yet present upon the earth in the body, and stood by each one of us.

We have unfolded what, and what kind of good that strengthening is which the Apostle intreated for the Colossians ; we have explained also whence it is derived, and by whose mediation it is conferred upon us: It remains that we now explain what end it subserves.

Unto all patience and long-suffering with joyfulness.] He shews the use and end of our divine strengthening and of our spiritual fortitude, viz. that it may beget in us patience or endurance, and long-suffering ; then he annexes the characteristic of Christian patience, viz. joyfulness. Let us inquire, first, what is the nature of these virtues.

Interpreters are not sufficiently agreed what is ücouom, patience, and what uaxpoS9vuía, long-suffering. Some refer brouomn, i. e. patience or endurance, to those evils which are inflicted by God ; waxpoSyua, to those which are laid upon us by men. Chrysostom so distinguishes them, as to say, that endurance is to be exercised towards those whom we are not able to punish; long-suffering towards those whom we may. He endures, therefore, who bears with equanimity that evil which he cannot repel: he is long-suffering, : who, being offended by an equal or an inferior, takes not revenge though he has it in his power.

But these expositions appear to me to restrict both words too much. It is more probable, then, that we should say ‘vzouow, or endurance, respects that load and weight of affliction visited upon us, either by God, or by men ; (for this word is derived a0 tou tropuévelv, which signifies to remain under a load of afflictions, and not to be overwhelmed by their weight); but uawpoSuuíav, or long-suffering, respects the length and duration itself of the incumbent evil. Therefore, he who is not broken either by the deferring too long our deliverance from evil, or by the protracting too long our reinstatement in good, the same hath this long-suffering, because his mind duly extends its view to the end which is far distant. (Tit. ii. 3; 2 Pet. iii. 12; Jude, 21).

These two virtues are the inseparable companions of that strength and fortitude which the Spirit liberally bestows upon us; for they are joined to that fortitude, as secondary virtues to the primary one. But they differ in this principally, that fortitude arms us against the fear and dread of evil approaching and attacking us, and does not allow us to flee and decline the fight: endurance and longsuffering support the mind itself against the perception of evil which has already come upon and arrested us, and does not permit us to sink under grief and sadness, but teaches us to bear it without any immoderate or unbecoming passion.—We see now what is the nature of endurance and long-suffering.

Let us consider, secondly, the necessity of these virtues ; and first of patience. Now this virtue is very necessary to all the godly, because occasion of exercising it occurs on every hand.

1. If we regard God himself, he exercises their patience in chastising them. Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth ; and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth, Heb. xii. 6. This chastisement, if patience be present, works with it for salvation; if absent, produces murmuring, desperation, and finally, condemnation.

2. If we regard the world, patience is very necessary to the godly : for in the world, and from the world they will have tribulation ; and as many as will live godly in Christ Jesus will suffer persecution. He, therefore, who is destitute of patience, is exposed naked to the iron storm of all weapons.

3. Lastly, if we regard other virtues, patience is necessary. For to faith, righteousness, chastity, punishment is often held out with infamy: Here patience unfolds its strength, and exhibits itself, as it were, a shield to the other virtues ; for

The virtue which patience does not sustain is a widow.

Prudent.

Patience is so ordained in the things of God, says Tertullian, that no one who is a stranger to patience can perform any precept. Whence that saying of Paul to the Romans ii. 6, 7, God will render to every one according to his deeds ; to those who endure, the glory of good works.

Now let us observe what relates to long-suffering ; nor is there less necessity for this :

First, by reason of the promised good ; for hope which is deferred afflicts the soul, Prov. xiii. 12. There is need therefore of long-suffering to those to whom the blessedness of heaven is promised, lest they grow remiss, and, through despair of the reward, cast off the exercise of godliness. For the flesh murmurs and rebels, and accuses God of delay and slackness, because he does not immediately confer what he promised : but this spiritual long-suffering says, For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. Heb. x. 37.

Secondly, there is need of long-suffering, by reason of the incumbent evils. For that which Epicurus was wont to say consoles not the godly: A// grief, if long, is light; af heavy, is short ;¹⁰⁰ for their afflictions are both heavy and protracted: The whole of their life is a warfare; all this life is to them a vale of tears. Ye shall weep and lament, says Christ, John xvi. 20, but the world shall rejoice. Where, then, is the comfort of the godly? In quietness and in con- Jidence shall be your strength; as Isaiah beautifully says, : cap. xxx. 15. And Jerome, Lament. iii. 25, 26, The Lord is good unto them that wait for him. It is good that a man should silently wait for the salvation of God.¹⁰¹

We have seen the nature and necessity of patience and long-suffering : Now let us ponder the fruit and admirable effects. And this is first to be premised, that the benefits which arise from afflictions, whatever they are, do not arise but through the medium of this patience: therefore they are the rather to be ascribed to patience than to that affliction, which is most hurtful to those who are impatient.

1. Patience discomfits and overthrows all its enemies, without inflicting or returning a wound; it does not deign to aim a weapon at them, nevertheless it achieves a conquest even by quietude. The heathen and their idolatries, says Augustine, Epist. 42, are overcome not by resistance, but by the martyrdom of Christians.

2. Patience causes all its enemies to serve itself, and contribute innumerable advantages: to say nothing of the rest, it occasions its persecutors to prepare for it the crown of the eternal kingdom. Blessed are they who suffer persecution for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven, Matt. v.10. Whence that saying of the martyr Vicentius to Dacian his tormentor, Never hath any one so well served me as thou hast.

3. Our patience confounds the devil, causes angels to rejoice, glorifies God himself, and, lastly, sometimes melts and converts the most inveterate enemies. Tertullian, captivated by the great advantage of this good, exclaimed, De patient: Let me lose all the world, provided I am enriched by patience.¹⁰²

With joyfulness.] These last words determine the character of true and christian patience; for hereby it is distinguished from that which is philosophical and hypocritical.” That which is philosophical, (such as is celebrated in the instance of Socrates) had not this spiritual joy united with it; that which is hypocritical hath inward repining: that alone which is Christian possesses joy and spiritual cheerfulness in the midst of calamities. They departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name. Acts v. 41.

But an objection is raised from the passage before adduced, viz. Ye shall lament, but the world shall rejoice : therefore the afflictions of the godly (it is said) do not produce gladness, but grief and tears. That opinion of the Philosopher in his Ethics, (Ethic 3) is also well known, That fortitude is occupied about a troublesome and unpleasant object, and therefore it is sufficient if a brave man be not sad, although he may not be joyful. .

I answer, This gladness is not concerning the object of patience, for that inflicts pain; but concerning the act, the advantage, and the end ; for the consideration of these produces gladness. To rejoice concerning an object is not suitable to every virtue; for there is some kind of virtue to which it pertains to grieve about its object, viz. penitence : but to rejoice concerning its own act pertains to every virtue ; because to every one endued with virtue, it is de- , lightful to exercise himself according to the habit of that virtue. Whence even the penitent himself rejoices, though it be at his own sorrow : so the brave and patient are made joyful by the very exercise of fortitude and patience, although from the objects of these virtues they feel grief and pain.

But this joyfulness, which arises from the consideration of its own virtuous and praiseworthy employ, is not that which the Apostle chiefly regarded ; but rather that which arises from confidence of the divine love; from a sure knowledge that all our afflictions work together for the good of our souls; from the certainty of deliverance, and the hope of glory. For so says the Apostle, A// things work together for good to them that love God, Rom. viii. 28. And in the Epistle to the Philip. i. 28, In nothing terrified by your adversaries ; which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to you of salvation. And the Saviour, Matth. v. 11, 12, When ye shall be persecuted, rejoice; because great is your reward in heaven. Gregory says, The more severely I am oppressed by present evils, the more certainly I anticipate Suture joys.

And thus much concerning the third part of the Apostle’s prayer, with which he concludes his exordium, or second part of this Chapter, and of the whole Epistle: We proceed to the third.

Verse 12.

Having explained the title of the Epistle, and the preface, we come now to the third part of this Chapter, which extends to the 23d verse; and contains the sum of Evangelical doctrine concerning the redemption of the human race.

Now in this part of the chapter the Apostle accomplishes three things.

1. He sets forth the benefit itself of redemption, from verse the 12th to the 15th.

2. He describes the person of the Redeemer, from that verse to the 20th.

3. He explains the manner of the Redemption, or of the procuring of our salvation, to verse 23d.

The benefit of Redemption contains in itself many other benefits, which we shall discuss in their order one by one. But we may reduce the sum of the Apostle’s discussion to this proposition, viz. We are saved by the merit and passion of Christ alone, who is sufficient to procure human salvation, without Jewish ceremonies and the other means which were foisted in by the false Apostles.

Let this in general be observed and premised: The best preservative against error is to hold aright the benefit of redemption; as also the sufficiency and efficacy of the Redeemer. For why does the Apostle undertake to unfold this doctrine? Doubtless that by the understanding of it all seductive subtleties may be dissipated.

By laying down the same foundation concerning the sufficiency of Christ the Redeemer and Mediator, we shall be able to expose and crush the errors of the Papists, respecting the invocation of saints, the necessity of human satisfactions, the granting of indulgences, and many others with which they have contaminated the Christian Religion. Most truly said Calvin, Popery stauds not except with ignorance of Christ.¹⁰³¹⁰⁴

Now we will follow the thread of the context, and begin from this 12th verse, in which three things are to be observed :

1. The primary cause of salvation, or of our redemption, the mercy of God;

2. The primary effect of this mercy, í(xavórw, a certain new and supernatural faculty and fitness in us ;

3. The end of this new faculty or meetness, that we may participate in the heavenly inheritance.

Giving thanks to the Father.] These words are connected with the 9th verse, where the Apostle says, We cease not to pray for you, and to desire that ye might be filled with all knowledge, &c.; now he subjoins, Giving thanks to the Father who hath made us meet. This third part of the chapter, which relates to the benefit of redemption, the Apostle beautifully and wisely opens by the giving of thanks: By which conduct of his he would intimate to us these two things ;

1. That this benefit of human redemption is so great that it would be impious not only to discourse, but even to think of without the utmost gratitude of soul. Scarcely ever does the Apostle mention this, but forthwith he breaks out into praising and blessing God. Ephes. i. 3, Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, &c. So Zacharias, Luke i. 68, Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, who hath redeemed, &c.¹⁰⁵

2. That we ought to give all diligence to be certified through the Spirit of faith, that we are in the number of those whom God hath made meet for the participation of eternal life. For it is absurd and preposterous to give thanks for a benefit received, when you are not yet sure whether it has been received or not. He therefore who, by his own example, wishes the Colossians and other Christians to give thanks to God for having obtained the benefit of salvation, wishes all to labour, that, by a true and lively faith, they may attain to this knowledge, being most full of comfort, and very needful to the Christian in this vale of tears. But to whom are thanks given? To God the Father.

To the Father.] To God and the Father, in some copies. The Apostle points out the primary cause of human salvation, viz. the unmerited goodness and mercy of God the Father. He names the Father, because as he is the fountain of Deity, so also is he to be understood as the fountain of all spiritual benefits. James i. 17. But we must not exclude either the Son or the Spirit: for their will and operation are conjoined in the salvation of the elect. As, i however, there is an order in the procession of the divine persons, so that the Son proceeds from the Father, and the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son: so also a certain order is to be understood in their operation; the Father worketh from himself, the Son from the Father, and the Spirit from both. We say that God the Father, or the whole Trinity, is the primary cause of our salvation from a twofold consideration ;

First, because from the mere good pleasure of his own will, before the foundations of the world were laid, he predestinated us to eternal life; as it is said Ephes. i. 4 and 5. For this, therefore, eternal thanks are to be given to God; for, without this, assuredly we should be altogether excluded from heaven. Rightly spake Prosper, No other shall come into the fellowship of the inheritance of Christ, but those who were chosen before the foundation of the world, De lib. arbitr. So the Saviour himself, Matth. xxv. 34, and Luke xii. 32, evooxnoev, Kc.

Secondly, because in time, through effectual calling, he draws the elect to himself, who, if left to their own inclination, would never embrace the salvation offered. No man, says Christ, cometh unto me, except the Father draw him, John vi. 44. But he draws by special, secret, and effica- Ch 2557 y 1029 which is communicated to those alone, but is Re L5 all others. Whence that observation of Augustine, In Epist. Joan tract. 4, Many hear, but those only are persuaded to whom God inwardly speaks.

Thus far concerning the primary cause of our salvation, viz. the mercy of God predestinating and effectually calling us; for which cause thanks are to be given to him.

Who hath made us meet.] Now let us weigh the primary effect of this divine goodness and mercy. And that is a certain spiritual worthiness or fitness, whereby we are, and are accounted meet to participate in the spiritual benefits which are communicated to men in Christ. But that this fitness or condition of new worthiness be found in us, presupposes two things on God’s part ; powerful operation and merciful acceptance. For it is by the Divine operation and acceptance we are made meet to participate in the lot of ! the saints.

“The divine operation is necessary, because we must be changed and become new creatures, before we can be partakers of celestial benefits. For there is in us nothing but an entire unfitness either to understand, or do, or, finally, to receive, spiritual good. “Oux ixavé: ’ecusv. We are not sufficient of ouiselves, 2 Cor. 11.5. Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom, &c.: 1 Cor. xv. 50. Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God, John iii. 3. Therefore that these obstacles may be removed, and we may be rendered meet, God renews us by the Spirit; he breathes into us the new life of grace; finally, he pours into our minds, faith, hope, love, and those other virtues which are required for the participation of the heavenly promises. Four this divine grace (as Aquinas has well said, Quest. disput. de virtut. art. 10,) is therefore communicated to the elect, that they may perform the actions ordained unto the end of eternal life. For it confers upon the soul a certain new principle of a spiritual and divine nature, whereby it is rendered meet for the participation of things that are spiritual and divine. For the nature of the human soul, how perfect soever in natural gifts, is, without grace, not susceptible of glory. Parisiensis, lib. de virt. cap. 11. Therefore the grace of God alone makes us meet for the participation of divine things, in effectually calling us, justifying, and sanctifying us by a certain internal operation of his Spirit.

But besides this operation of God, which renders us meet by changing and regenerating us, the merciful acceptance of God is also required, to cover our infirmities and reckon our feeble endeavours in the room of perfect obedience. For as there is nothing good in us, unless we have been renewed by the divine operation; so the good things of the renewed would be even as nothing worth for the enjoyment of the heavenly heritage, unless they were accepted by the most indulgent Father for the sake of the transcendent worthiness of Christ. Therefore, that there may be in us the least spark of good, the power of God in . working it is required ; and that that good, whatever it be, may make us meet to be reckoned among the children and heirs of the kingdom, his fatherly clemency is requisite in accepting it.

Nor need we look far for a reason why we think this acceptance necessary, since it is certain, that in the regenerate themselves, after the operation of the regenerating Spirit, there is not perfect newness: but as in wine diluted, the water as well as the wine is mingled in every part; so in the whole renewed man, the qualities of regeration and the remains of corruption, are found blended together. No one in this life is thoroughly perfect: for the infirmity of the godly is not yet healed, but is daily being healed, Prosper, De vit. contempl. i. 9. Whether, then, we regard the inward qualities, or the external acts of the . godly, they are not meet to participate the lot of the saints i: light, without this merciful acceptance. Woe to the commendable life of man, if thou sift it without mercy, says Augustine, Confess. lib. ix. cap. 13. And the Psalmist, exlii. 2, Enter not into judgment with thy servant, for in thy sight shall no flesh be justified. Beautifully writes the Apostle to the Ephes. i. 5, 6, God hath adopted us according to the good pleasure of his will, He hath accepted us by his grace in the beloved.

These things being established concerning the Divine operation and acceptance, we may deduce a few corollaries.:

1. It is not in the power of fallen and corrupted man to make himself meet for the participation of spiritual gifts, such as grace, faith, blessedness: God alone, who imparts the gifts, gives with them the disposition also for their reception. Wherefore what some of the Schoolmen assert about the preparations and dispositions which proceed from the power of free-will in the state of corrupt nature, are to be received with caution: Such as that saying of Durandus, In Sentent. lib. i. qu. 6, Although it be not in the power of man to produce in himself. love or grace, yet it is in his power so far to dispose himself, as that God will give grace to him. And that of Albert, Compend. v. 2,¹⁰⁶ Grace is not given unless to those who have an aptitude for grace.

But to these we oppose plain Scripture, which everywhere teaches that God sixavidca:, i. e. renders us sufficient and meét for spiritual and heavenly things, since of ourselves we are most unmeet, either to receive or perform them. Against these also we place in opposition the more sound of the Schoolmen: Free-will, says Aquinas, ts not the cause of grace, by means of an adequate disposition. God, observes Parisiensis, previously confers upon us our efforts and preparations, that he may afterwards render them more profitable. And again, Although I am moved towards thee, O Lord, but faintly and weakly ; yet am I not moved at all, but by Thee, when drawn towards Thee. Idem.

2. The general offer of grace which is propounded to. all by the ministry of the Gospel, is not sufficient to procure salvation; but, that it may become efficacious, there must needs be added the internal operation of God, which — renders us meet to receive grace and salvation. The offer of grace and salvation is common to all through the preaching of the Gospel; but that internal efficacious operation, which fits and qualifies us to lay hold upon salvation, is peculiar to the elect. — A7 that the Father giveth ) me, shall come to me, John vi. 37. The world cannot receive the Spirit of truth, John xiv. 17. Whence also that in Acts xiii. 48, As many as were ordained to eternal life believed. Augustine acknowledges this peculiar operation of God in the case of the elect, De predest. sanct. lib. i. cap. 16, They who attain to the vocation according to the purpose, must all be taught of God, neither can any one of them say, I have believed, that thereby I might be called : for I have been called by the mercy of God to believe. God does not work in us to will and to do good, because by precepts externally given he speaks inwardly upon our senses, but because he inwardly sheds abroad his love in our hearts. Idem, De Spirit. de lit. cap. 25.

3. No one from the merit of inherent righteousness, or of his good works, can claim to himself the lot of the saints: For how can we force our righteousness upon God, or urge our good works as meriting heaven, when we have nothing good of ourselves? But as Augustine well said, Whoever reckons up his deeds of righteousness to Thee, what does he enumerate, but Thine own gifts? Confess. lib. ix. cap. 13.

Let us therefore be content to be called, through grace and by Divine acceptance, to the enjoyment of the heavenly heritage, and humbly confess that of ourselves we are most unworthy of so great a favour. God has made us meet, by regenerating us through the Spirit, and by accepting us for Christ’s sake. And thus much concerning this primary effect and benefit of Divine mercy, viz. that He makes us meet for eternal life.

To partake of the inheritance of the saints in light.] The Apostle here shews the end or fruit of the Divine operation in the regenerating and sanctifying of the elect. For it may be asked, What profit arises to us hereby, that we are renewed and enlightened ? that we become imbued with faith and love? that we are received into the favour of God? The answer is, By this Divine work we are made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light, ‘eig Tw juepida, TOU KAnpoU.

In all these expressions there is something ambiguous and obscure. The word sors is taken in two ways, either for a state and condition, or for a portion and inheritance.* It is used for state and condition by the poets. Sors tua mortalis, says Ovid, Your mortal lot: so in Horace, Nemo dicitur vivere contentus suá sorte, No one is said to live contented with his lot, 1. e. his state and condition. If we adopt this meaning, the Apostle says that he gives thanks to God, because He had translated himself and the Colossians from the state of children of wrath, into a new state and the condition of children of God. For God, in regenerating the elect, and infusing into them faith and holiness, gives them this dignity, that they may become sons of

y Davenant here, as elsewhere, quotes the Vulgate, where the Greek TOU xAnpou is rendered sortis, of the lot; in our translation, of the inheritance, God, John i, 12, 13; that from being strangers and foreigners, they may become fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God: Ephes. ii.19. So Acts xxvi. 18.

But this, although it be a true, is not the full exposition. I annex, therefore, that other concerning the portion and heritage to be participated by all the godly. For, as the Tsraelites divided the land of Canaan by lot, it hence came to pass that that inheritance which had been assigned to each tribe, was called its lot. Hence the lot of Ephraim, and the lot of Judah, &c Josh. xv. 1. Here the Apostle, alluding to the heavenly inheritance, calls it also the lot of the saints. He would therefore have the Colossians made meet not only for participating the condition of children now, but also for their future inheritance.

In light; And because he adds i4 light; some explain this of the light of faith; others, of the light of glory: but the Apostle, methinks, would include both with reference to the respective periods. For,

1. God renders all his children meet to partake of life eternal by a participation of the light of hope and faith commenced in this life; even as it is said in John vi. 47, He that believeth in me hath eternal life: he does not say shall have, but hath. A true bedever, says Clemens, rejoices because of those things which are promised, as already present ; ° and being certainly persuaded of them, he already possesses them, though future. Strom. 7.

2. But it must also be added, that they are likewise made meet to partake of the lot of the saints in the light of glory, as to the future world. For grace is given to the faithful, that they may be led on to glory; according to those words of the Apostle, Rom. viii. 30, Whom he predestinated, he called ; whom he called, he justified ; whom he justified, he glorified. God, therefore, in effectually calling and justifying the elect, makes them meet to obtain glory, i. e. to partake of the lot of the saints in light. We are now in possession of the meaning of the Apostle: hence let us deduce some observations. .

1. Inasmuch, as the Apostle says that we are made meet e mepida, not els uepidas, for a portion of the blessed, not for portions, he would have us to understand the wide distinction between this heavenly and an earthly inheritance. For an earthly inheritance the more it is divided among several, the less is possessed by each: but the heavenly kingdom is possessed entire by innumerable saints; yet so that the number of the participants hinders not the most perfect and full participation to each.

2. But because he calls eternal life a /ut, he intimates under the name of a /ot that this kingdom is not to be attained by our own strength or virtues, but is bestowed upon us by divine Providence ; as we have it in Prov. xvi. 33, The lot is cast into the lap; Jehova autem est ratio ejus, as Tremellius renders it ; but the Lord is the disposer of it.

3. It is called the lot of the saints, not of all persons indiscriminately, that the unbelieving and unholy may understand this lot belongs not to them. For so the Apostle, ICor. vi. 9, Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, &c. The ungodly have their lot, but it lies in earthly gains and pleasures; as they themselves confess, Wisdom ii. 7, 8, 9, Let us fill ourselves with costly wine and ointments ; let us crown ourselves with roses; for this is our portion, and our lot is this. Far more excellent is this lot of the godly : for God is their portion, Lamen. iii. 24. They who have obtained this lot, are called saints in heaven: they who would obtain it, must live as saints upon earth.

4. Lastly, this inheritance of the blessed is said to be laid up in light, that we may understand it to be something lovely, delightful, and comforting in the highest degree ; for nothing can be more lovely or more pleasant than light. That region of the saints shines not by the light of the sun, for the glory of God doth lighten it, and the Lamb as the light thereof, Rev. xxi. 23. By this metaphor then, the kingdom of heaven is contrasted with that place of torment which is said to be filled with thick darkness, that the mind may conceive of it, as a place most horrible, hideous, and loathsome. He would therefore inflame us with a love of this lot of the saints, which is illumined with such light; and fill us with horror at that opposite lot of the wicked, which is enveloped in darkness and deep gloom.

Verses 13, 14.

The Apostle has been hitherto employed in enumerating and enlarging upon those saving benefits which have been bestowed upon us by God the Father: for the benefits of our redemption are so united, that he who is a partaker of one is a partaker of all. Who hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light, is the verse preceding. Now, in verse 13, the Apostle connects two other benefits, without which that preceding one cannot stand; and these are, deliverance from the power of darkness, and translation into the kingdom of his dear Son.

Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness.] In explaining this benefit, three things are to be shewn by us: 1. Who hath delivered ; 2. Whom, or what sort of persons ; - 3. From what.

1. Who? God the Father; for these words are immediately connected with the foregoing, Giving thanks to God the Father, who hath made us meet — Who also hath delivered, or hath forcibly plucked us away.* But the Father being spoken of, we ought to understand the whole Trinity in these external operations ; as we have before observed. Wherefore the original author of man’s deliverance is the Triune and One God, who purposed this from eternity, and in the fulness of time sent his Son to accomplish this work which he had decreed. So God loved the world, &c.

» “ Egevearro, eripuit. “ Not simply liberavit, sed eripuit. The word signifies by main force to deliver, or pluck away, even as David pulled the lamb out of the bear’s mouth.”— Vide Leigh’s Critica Sacra. John iii. Therefore it is properly said by the Schoolmen, The whole Trinity redeemed man by an act of power ; the incarnate Son redeemed him by the effect of his humiliation. And no one else ought to, or could, deliver man, except God alone; of whose power and will he was created out of nothing. None other ought, because (as Tertullian well observes) by this act he would forcibly take away from the Creator his own servant. For so great is this benefit of deliverance, that it binds us more than the benefit of creation itself. If, therefore, one had made us and another had delivered us, we should have been more strictly bound to that other deliverer than to God the Creator. Hence also another remark of Tertullian, Who ought to seek the lost sheep? Ought not he who lost it? Who lost it 2 Was it not he who possessed it ? Who possessed it? Was it not he who created it? But neither could any other deliver. For he must necessarily be stronger than the devil who could wrest his prey from him: For no one can enter into a strong man’s house and seize his goods, unless he shall have first bound the strong man, and then he shall spoil his house; Matth. xii. 29. But who could overcome and bind this prince of darkness who was holding us captive, except the mighty God alone? It was he, therefore, who plucked us from him.

Us.] We must consider, in the second place, Whom, or what sort of persons God delivered. And this consideration may be twofold ; of those who were to be delivered, or of those who have been delivered.

While we were to be delivered, i. e. previous to our deli- i verance, we were not only diseased and weak, but were openly and secretly opposed to our own deliverance. CEcumenius,¹⁰⁷ describing the infirmity of fallen man, says, He was without strength, and having need of great help. Also, shewing his rebellion, and hostile mind, he says, he was even impious, having rejected the helper. The Apostle himself paints man in the condition of corrupt nature in these same colours, in Rom. v.

1. Observe here the immeasurable love of God, who would. deliver such persons: for no one cares to redeem a thing of no value.

2. Observe the infinite power of God, who delivered man in spite of the devil, and against the will of man himself ; as the angel did Lot out of Sodom.

And now the other thing is respecting those who have been already delivered: for after they have been set at liberty, they are faithful and holy who were before rebels and unholy. If therefore it be asked, What sort of persons are they whom the mercy of God hath delivered? The © answer is, that they now are new men, shining in faith and godliness. Us, says the Apostle, hath he delivered; i. e. us who believe; us who love the brethren ; us who walk worthy of the Lord, bringing forth the fruit of all good works: such he hath delivered.

Hence it is manifest,

1. Whatever carnal men dream about their deliverance and salvation, is most vain. For as the Israelites, whilst they served Pharaoh, and lusted after the Egyptian fleshpots, were not in the enjoyment of liberty ; so Christians, ° whilst they obey the devil, whilst they wallow in the delights of sin, are not delivered from slavery and a state of condemnation.

2. Hence also we infer, for the consolation of the godly, That the faithful and godly alone are free, are lonoured, are unspeakably precious with God; whilst, on the other hand, the ungodly, although they glitter in the eyes of men, are accounted for slaves the most vile and abject. Truly said Clemens, Strom. viii. The most excellent thing in the earth ts the man who most serveth God.

From the power of darkness.] Who the deliverer is, what sort of persons they who are delivered had been and are, has been shewn : it now remains to explain from what they have been delivered, From the power of darkness ; 1. e. from the power of the devil, of sin, and of hell; or, in one word, from the state of corrupt nature, under which all those things are comprehended ; or, as others are accustomed to say, from the darkness of ignorance, of unrighteousness, of misery. All these come to the same point: we need not, therefore, labour for words.

We are said to be delivered from the power of darkness, because we are delivered from the power of the devil, who is the prince of darkness, and labours more and more to darken and to blind his subjects. We all are born under his kingdom and power, so that before our deliverance he worketh in us according to his own will. Thus in Ephes. ii. 2, Wherein in times past ye walked according to the prince of this world, Wherefore one of the Fathers said, That a throne, as it were, was erected for the devil in the heart of every ungodly man: and those who are not yet liberated he terms, the horses of the devil ; because he drives them hither and thither at will. But this prince of darkness is bruised under the feet of the faithful, Rom. xvi. 20, to whom, by the Spirit of God, new strength is administered to trample upon this unclean spirit.

2. God hath delivered us from the power of sin, which hath blinded the understanding, corrupted the will, and placed us in a condition of darkness both as to knowledge and to spiritual and saving practice. Ye were sometime darkness, Ephes. v. 8. So John i. The light shineth in darkness ; iii. but men have loved darkness, viz. the darkness both of ignorance and wickedness. Now from this darkness God has rescued us, whilst he pours in the light of faith, whilst he imparts the Spirit of holiness ; which blessings being bestowed, this power and dominion of sin is dissolved. ‘Apmaptia üuov s xupiéuce, Rom. vi. 14, The body of sin is destroyed, that henceforth ye should not serve sin, ver. 6.

Lastly, He hath delivered his people from the power of hell, i. e. from the miseries and calamities which arise from the guilt of reigning sin. For hell is described as a place of darkness, Matth. xxv. 30, Cast ye him into outer darkness. From the power of this infernal darkness they are delivered by the Divine mercy, for there is no condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus, Rom. viii. 1. In every case, therefore, God hath delivered his people from the power of darkness. We touch upon these points lightly now, because all of them are to be treated again.

1. Observe for instruction; that the whole world is involved in darkness under the devil, neither is there a spark of saving light to be found in us before deliverance; for we are in the power of darkness; that is to say, spiritual darkness hath dominion over us.

2. Observe for caution; that the godly, being delivered, ought to have no fellowship with the works of darkness: for they are rescued from the power of the devil and of sin, and therefore by serving these they shew themselves to be deserters. Let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, &c. Rom. xiii. 12.

3. Observe for consolation; that although the godly are often oppressed by temporal calamities, yet they are delivered from that great misery which consists in the horror and guilt of eternal death, in comparison of which misery, all external evils are light and trifling.

And hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son.] The Apostle annexes a new benefit, which much enhances the loving-kindness of God. For it seemed a light matter to him to deliver us from the power of darkness, i. e. from ] a condition of the deepest misery, unless he translated us from thence into the kingdom, i.e. into a state of the greatest felicity and joy.

From which conjunction of these benefits we may infer; That there is no middle state; but all men are either most wretched slaves under the dominion of Satan, or translated into the kingdom of Christ. There is no third kingdom; neither can the same person be a subject to both. But let us come to the express words of the text.

There are three points to be well considered in these words : What is the nature of this translation? What may be understood by the kingdom into which we are translated? Why it is called the kingdom of his dear Son, and not of God, or of heaven, or of light? which regard to the contrast seems to have required. ^ And hath translated us, wetertncs.| This word seems to have been borrowed from those who plant colonies and compel people to migrate from their native soil, in order to inhabit some new region: for so God has translated us from the kingdom of darkness, which is the native soil of us all, into the kingdom of the pious and blessed.

But how hath he translated us? We may understand that from the contrast. We are living in the kingdom of darkness, in consequence of our blindness, infidelity, and impurity ; but from this kingdom to that other we remove by means of effectual knowledge, faith, and holiness. Acts xxvi. 18. Unrighteousness and wickedness constitute us the servants of the devil; faith and godliness constitute us the household of God. !

God translates us then from that melancholy and gloomy kingdom, when he illuminates our hearts by pouring into them faith, when he changes and restores our will by imparting grace; for, being enlightened and sanctified, a man is by that very act translated from the power of darkness into the kingdom of his Son; because he cannot possibly be at the same time a citizen of two cities, which observe contrary laws and institutions.

Here observe, To be delivered from darkness it is not enough that we be called to this kingdom, and admonished to desert that other; but it is necessary that we be translated and changed by the mighty working of the Holy Spirit from our former condition into this new one. .

Here the error of the Pelagians is detected, who would have grace to be nothing else than that which acts as a “ monitor of free-will.¹⁰⁸ But from this passage and innumerable others, it is manifest that we have need not only of such admonishing grace, but of that which changes, heals, liberates, and translates ; for without such grace no one gets out of the kingdom of Satan.

Therefore He is to be regarded with the highest and unceasing honour who has translated us into this kingdom: for so are colonies accustomed to honour their founder.

Into the kingdom.] Let us inquire now what is intended by this word kingdom. The kingdom of God, ov the kingdom of Christ, or the kingdom of heaven, in sacred Scripture denotes many things.

1. First, it is put for the state of glory and blessedness: as when we are commanded to seek the kingdom of God, Matth. vi. 33; when [it is said] the ungodly sAa// not inherit the kingdom of God, 1 Cor. vi. 9. If we understand the kingdom of the Son in this manner, then God must be said to have translated his people into this kingdom, inasmuch as they have a right to it, and possess it in hope, although not in reality. But this does not seem to me to accord with the design of the Apostle in this place.¹⁰⁹

2. Secondly, it is put for the promulgation and knowledge of the Gospel: as, To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, Matth. xiii.11. The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, &c. Matth. xxi. 43. These only are my fellow-workers unto the kingdom of God, Coloss. iv.11. In this sense God is said to translate those into the kingdom of his Son, whom he plucks from the darkness of ignorance and idolatry, and enlightens with the knowledge of the Gospel. Thus the Colossians, thus all Christians, are translated from the power of darkness into the kingdom of Christ, which is the kingdom of light. But this translation denotes only the external and apparent state of a Christian; whereas the Apostle speaks of the internal.

Lastly, it is taken for a state of grace, i. e. for the acquisition of remission of sins, of renovation, and of divine favour on account of Christ the Messiah and Mediator: also for the whole multitude of those who are in this state. The kingdom of God is within you, Luke xviii. 21. The kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost, Rom, xiv. 17. I deem this to be the peculiarly proper sense of this expression. For God is said to have translated us into the kingdom of his Son, because he hath communicated to us those spiritual gifts, and wrought in us that spiritual condition, which makes us subjects and members of Christ. Therefore, by the kingdom of Christ we must understand all the benefits of grace which are obtained through union with and subjection to Christ our spiritual King. You now understand what the kingdom of Christ is.

From what has been said, observe now the contrast of these kingdoms, that ye may be able to hate the one, and long after the other. The kingdom of Satan is the kingdom of darkness, i.e. of ignorance, of wickedness, of misery: the kingdom of Christ is the kingdom of saving knowledge, of righteousness, of happiness. Who would not deliver himself by flight from that doleful kingdom, and shift his abode to this blessed one? But we find that it happens far otherwise ; for all are desirous of remaining in the kingdom of the devil, almost even to their latest breath, and then only to be translated into the kingdom of Christ.

The kingdom of his dear Son; or of the Son of his love.] It remains that, in the last place, we consider well why the Apostle calls it the kingdom of his Son, not of God, or of heaven, or of light, as in other places.

1. It is very aptly called the kingdom of the Son, because God admits no one to this kingdom, be it understood either of grace or of glory, except through his Son as Mediator. He is the channel of grace; through his mediation its streams flow to us, and we are planted in this spiritual kingdom ; as is evident from Ephes. i. 3,8.

2. This kingdom is called the kingdom of the Son, because Christ the Mediator received it from the Father to order the government and administration of it to the end of time. He is the Head and the Saviour of his Church ; he confers both grace and glory after his own good pleasure: I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me, Luke xxii. 29.

3. The Apostle probably called it the kingdom of the Son, rather than of God, or of light, because he wished to open the way and make an easy transition for discoursing . on the person of the Son. For he immediately enters upon that doctrine, which he could not so aptly have proceeded to unless he had expressly named the Son.

Now since this kingdom of grace and glory may be truly called the kingdom of Christ, we must strive to be one with Christ, and to be grafted in him: For those who are plucked away from Christ, are the withered branches of the vine, and exiles from this kingdom, although they seem to dwell in it, and even to enjoy its privileges.

Of the Son of his love, or his beloved Son, tng &yám; ávrs.] This is an Hebraism: The Son of his love, i. e. his Son most beloved; as, the Son of perdition, the most abandoned.

Christ is rightly called the Son of the Father’s love, because he hath the Father’s whole and entire love communicated to him, even as he had his essence. This God himself hath manifested by a voice from heaven, This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased, Matth. xviii. 5. But it is mentioned in this place, that from hence we may understand that we are loved by God in Christ the wellbeloved.

This is a great consolation to the godly man, when he calls to mind that he is not merely a subject, but a member of Christ so beloved of God. For hence he derives the hope of obtaining from God whatever is necessary to salvation. For how can he refuse his subjects, his friends, the brethren of his Son whom he loves with singular love?

Hence, if any one being planted in Christ is seduced through his infirmity, or the temptation of Satan, to commit sin, he takes confidence of pardon; for God, who with such a supreme affection loves Christ himself, cannot hate those who are in Christ, and enjoy the having him for their intercessor with God. 1 John ii. 1.

To conclude, in a word: The love of God towards Christ, is the cause and most certain earnest of his kindness towards all those who are translated into the kingdom of Christ.

Verse 14.

us.

The Apostle descends from God the Father to Christ the God-man, the Mediator, the instrumental cause of our salvation: For God hath delivered us from the power of darkness, God hath translated us into the kingdom of grace; but by the mediation of his Son.

Therefore in this short verse he accomplishes three purposes: he shews, 1. Who is our Redeemer ; the incarnate Son of God, In whom we have redemption. 2. What, and what sort of redemption it is of which he speaks ; viz. such as consists in the remission of sins. 3. With what price this redemption was acquired and purchased, through his blood.

In whom we have redemption.] These words are connected with the last in the former verse: Jn whom, viz. in his beloved Son. Here, therefore, it is proper to consider the person of the Redeemer.

Christ the Son of God, the God-man, is our Redeemer. This work required God, that he might overcome death : and man that he might die for us. As God, by right of property he undertook this work of redeeming his creatures; as man, by right of relationship he undertook to redeem his brethren.

To accomplish this work of redemption, not the Divinity alone, not the humanity alone was necessary ; no, not an angelic nature; but the Son of God alone; who, as the Apostle says, Phil. ii. when he was in the form of God, made himself of no reputation: and took upon himself the form of a servant, a.d was made in the likeness of men. Whence also that declaration that the Church was purchased with the blood of God, Acts xx. 28. Well spake Augustine, that which mediates between divinity alone, and humanity alone, is the human divine nature, and the divine human na- i ture. Nor was it ill said by Aquinas, The humanity of Christ is the instrument, the divinity is the chief agent in fulfilling the work of our salvation, Quest. disp. de verb. art. 5.

From this consideration of the person who redeems us, we may observe the infinite guilt of sin; agreeable to that remark of Bernard, Acknowledge, O mun, how grievous are those wounds for which it is needful the Son of God should be wounded. This ought to strike us with horror and detestation of sin.

It demonstrates also the infinite love of God towards the human race, who willingly sent his own Son to redeem miserable mortals. Let this inflame us with reciprocal love; let this excite us to every kind of obedience.

It must also be observed, that the Apostle does not say we have redemption by the Son of God, but i» him. For by Christ the whole world is said to be redeemed, inasmuch as he offered and gave a sufficient ransom for all ; but in him the elect and faithful alone have effectual redemption, because they alone are in him.

Hence we learn that no one hath, or can have, any fruit of the redemption procured by Christ, unless he be in Christ. But we are engrafted in Christ through faith by the Holy Spirit. Therefore salvation is not derived to us unless from Christ our Head; for when he becomes our Head, and we his members, then we are in him, then his saving virtue extends to us; but not before: For he is the Saviour of his body, Ephes. v. 23.

Here also we must briefly resolve a doubt. For, when the Apostle says, In whom we have redemption, viz. we Christians, through the one oblation of the Son of God our Redeemer; it may, I say, be asked, Whether the Fathers under the Old Testament enjoyed this redemption? Christ not being then born, not to say offered, for the expiation of the sins of men.

We answer, the faithful under the Old Testament enjoyed redemption in Christ through his blood which was to be shed, like as we have through his blood having been shed: because this sacrifice of Christ had a saving efficacy, not only by the actual offering, but by the eternal decree of God, and the eternal efficacy of the same sacrifice, as well before as after it was offered. Jesus Christ the same yesterday, to-day, and for evermore, Heb. xii. 8. The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, Rev. xiii. 8. Therefore all the faithful under the Law, by faith in the Son of God, had Redemption even as we under the Gospel. Abraham saw the day of Christ and was glad, John viii. 56. He saw it, not by carnal but spiritual vision. Augustine, and the rest of the Fathers concur in this most true opinion. All the just before Christ lived by the same faith as ourselves, Contr. Epist. Pelag. lib. iii. cap. 4.— In ancient times there were spiritually righteous men; faith in a Christ to come dwelt in them, Contr. adversar. leg. et proph. lib. i. cap. 17. Their faith and ours was the same, because they believed that would be done to him which we believe hath been done, ad Optat. Epist 157.

Thus much concerning the Redeemer, viz. Christ the Son of God, incarnate and dead as concerning us; but who was to become incarnate, and to die, as concerning the ancient Fathers.

The forgiveness of sius.] The Apostle summarily comprises and explains what he understands by redemption : for these words are connected by apposition with those, In whom we have redemption, 1. e. the forgiveness of sins.

The Apostle adds this explanation with the best intention: for we have not as yet entire and full redemption, but we expect z¢ in the day of the resurrection. We have that redemption which consists in the forgiveness of sins ; and having obtained it, we are delivered from the bondage of the devil, of sin, and of hell. The devil cannot any longer detain us as captives, rule us as his slaves, and drive us here and there as he pleases; sin itself which cleaves to us cannot reign in us ; finally, even hell cannot torment us with perpetual fear, or claim any lordship over us: For, our sins being remitted, the power of the devil is broken, the wrath of God is removed, the condemnation of eternal death is taken away. From all these things, therefore, we have redemption at the same time that we have forgiveness of sins. But there is yet another bond- , age, viz. that of the corruption of our bodies, and of eternal sufferings, from which the elect are not yet redeemed, but shall be redeemed at the coming of Christ. Luke xxi. 28, Lift up your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh. The Apostle calls this &zoxórpociw erepíaroínotos, the redemption of the purchased possession, Ephes. i. 14. This also Christ merited for us: but he would not bestow upon believers at once this incorruption of their bodies, and deliverance from present external miseries, and from the remains of sin, for the following reasons ;

First, lest the condition of the head and of the members should be plainly dissimilar, For Christ himself was a man of sorrows, having endured every kind of misery: he did not at once sit down at the right hand of the Father in glory, but first underwent hunger, thirst, crucifixion, and death: it is therefore but consistent, that the members of Christ should pass likewise through sufferings and death itself to glory.

Secondly, they are not fully redeemed from these bodily afflictions, neither from the remains of sin, that they may have matter for glorifying God, whilst they endure them with the greatest constancy and patience, whilst they resist with all their might all the lusts of sin; that God, even as a just judge, may confer upon them, after having well fought this fight, the unfading crown.

Lastly, he would not straightway deliver the faithful from this bodily misery instantly, lest Christians should seem to embrace Christ on account of this temporal deliverance, rather than on account of that spiritual one.

To conclude, therefore, when the Apostle explains redemption by the remission of sins, he wishes to shew what part of the benefit of redemption is granted to believers now, and what is reserved for them in another world.

Through his blood.] We have already treated of the person of the Redeemer, and also of the blessing of redemption itself. “The last branch only of this verse remains, concerning the price or method of redemption, through his blood, i.e. this redemption was procured through his bloody death. The Apostle states the price expressly, because captives are redeemed or liberated from bondage in many other ways:

1. By free manumission: as when a master voluntarily dismisses his slave from his bondage and declares him free. But this mode was unsuitable; because God had determined otherwise; and because the devil, who held us captive, never would have voluntarily dismissed us.

2. By exchange; so we read it was often practised in wars, as when the Carthaginians sent to Rome, ten Romans who had been taken in battle, upon condition that the Romans should restore as many taken from the Carthaginians. But neither in this way could the redemption of man have been accomplished: for by no exchange of any creature could the reproach brought upon God by man be compensated.

3. Dy violent abduction: as when David by force of arms delivered his men, and recovered them from the hands of the Amalekites, 1 Sam. 30. But neither in this manner ought the human race to have been delivered : for although Christ might justly wrest from the devil, by main force, the prey which that robber had acquired by wicked craft; yet could not man, guilty as he was of treason against God, be reconciled in that manner.

4. The last and only ground therefore of redeeming us remained, viz. that which might be effected by way of justice, all our debts being paid by our Surety, Christ Jesus. But by the payment of what ransom did he discharge so vast a debt? Not with gold and silver, but his precious blood, 1 Pet. i. 18.

Through blood.’.] He points at Christ’s bloody death: not that the previous acts and sufferings of Christ did nothing to merit human salvation; but that by pouring out his blood, i. e. in death, there was a completion of satisfaction. Although, as Aquinas truly says, any one act of Christ was meritorious in our behalf, yet to make satisfaction for the guilt of human nature which was under the bond of death, it was necessary that Christ should sustain death ; Quest. disput. de grat. Christi, art. 7. But we are redeemed by this blood, or by this death, of Christ, inasmuch as it expiated the wrath of God, inasmuch as it dissipated the power of the devil.

Christ averted the wrath of God from us, by undergoing the penalties due to it, that he might liberate us from our debts. He without any evil deserts (says Augustine) underwent punishment, that we without any that were good might obtain grace. And the Apostle, Gal. iii. 18, affirms, Christ was made a curse for us, that he might redeem us from the curse.

Here therefore we must observe, that although the devil held us captives, yet the price of ourrederption, that is to say, the blood of Christ, was offered as a satisfaction to God, not to the devil: therefore it rested with God either to condemn or to absolve: and God being reconciled, and sin remitted, the power of the devil immediately vanished. And God is abundantly satisfied in the death of Christ for the sins of the whole world, because the death of Christ was the death of God; the blood of Christ, the blood of God: Therefore from the infinite dignity of his person, the price of his blood and his flesh which he offered for us was infinite. So Cyril, De recta fide ad Regin. lib. 2, /f God incarnate and suffering in his own person be understood, every creature is trifling in comparison of him, and the death of his one body suffices for the redemption of the world.¹¹⁰

Thus, then, satisfaction has been made to God and our sins expiated. Now we must shew how the shedding of the blood of Christ, not only hath reconciled God to us, but also utterly destroyed the power of the devil: for from him hath this bloody death of Christ delivered us.

Now to understand this, in the first place it must be admitted, that the power of the devil over man was upheld by the sin of man. For if we suppose that man is free from sin, then by no pretext of right whatever could the devil exercise any power over him. When, therefore, the devil attacked Christ our Saviour who was free from sin, and by his satellites, the Jews, put him to a most painful and ignominious death, he lost, by the judgment of God himself, the power which he had over us the guilty, through having exercised that which he had not over Christ the innocent. For, by this injury offered to Christ, and endured patiently by him, God adjudged to him power over the devil, and over all that he had possessed; so that he might take from him the spoil at his pleasure, and rescue out of his hands whomsoever he might think fit. Therefore after that the devil was overcome by the death of Christ in a way of justice, and deprived of his possessions by the Divine decree ; then Christ, having triumphed over him, took from him, by an irresistible arm, his own elect, and trampled him not only under his own feet, but under the feet of all his people. Thus the devil was vanquished by the death and blood of Christ, and we are rescued from his jaws.

To this doctrine both the Scriptures and the Fathers bear testimony. God foretold this victorious death of Christ, Gen. iii. 15, 1 will put enmity between thy seed and between the seed of the woman: It shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. And in Isa. liii. 12, He shall divide the spoils of the strong,¹¹¹ because he hath poured out his soul unto death. He suffered his innocent soul¹¹² to be forced from him, that he might deliver our guilty souls from the power of the devil. Augustine, lib. xiii. De Trin. cap. 14, What is the righteousness by which the devil was conquered ? What but the righteousness of Jesus Christ? And how was he conquered ? Because, though he could find in him nothing worthy of death, nevertheless he slew him. And verily it was just that he should let go the debtors whom he held, because they believed in him whom, without owing any debt, he slew. And ‘ cap. 15, [n redemption, the blood of Christ is given as a ransom, as it were, for us; which being accepted, the devil is not enriched, but bound, that we might be freed from his bonds. Similar expressions are to be met with in Theodoret, De Provid. Serm. 10, and in Leo, Serm. 5. De passione Domini.f 170 AN EXPOSITION OF $T. PAUL’S Chap. i.

From what has been thus said concerning the method of our redemption, various passages of Scripture apparently opposed to each other, are reconciled: Some of which assert that we are justified and saved freely, as Rom. iii. 24 ; others teach that we are redeemed with a price, as 1 Cor. vi. 20. Some declare that by the might and power of Christ, we were delivered from the power of the devil, and that he was spoiled, triumphed over, and destroyed, as Col, 1159085; Heb. ii. 14. Now all these passages are equally true. For we are redeemed and saved freely, as it respects ourselves ; since we ourselves contributed nothing to our redemption. We are redeemed with a price, as it respects God ; for Christ offered his own blood to him for our redemption. We are delivered by power and might, as respects the devil; whom, being previously conquered by Christ, and delivered over to him by right, He spoiled by force of arms.

From this redemption obtained by the death and blood of Christ alone, we deduce these inferences ;

1. We are not our own masters, but the servants of the Redeemer: we ought not therefore to serve our own lusts, but to yield obedience to his commands.

2. Neither our own satisfactions, nor merits, nor the sufferings of martyrs, could redeem us from the penalties ‘ for the Catholic Faith rendered him obnoxious to the Eutychians, by whom he was deposed in the Synod which they held at Ephesus; but he was restored to his diocese by the Council of Chalcedon in 421. Nothing is known of his future history, except that he was alive till after A.D. 460, and was renowned for the sanctity and simplicity of his manners, and as an eloquent, copious, and learned writer, remarkable for his acquaintance with all the branches of sacred erudition. He wrote, besides his Ecclesiastical History from the time of Constantine to that of Theodosius the younger, and his Discourses on Providence above adverted to, Commentaries on the Scriptures; Epistles; Lives of famous Anchorites; Dialogues; and Books on Heresy. In his ingenious and learned treatise, De curandis Greecorum affectionibus, * he opposed,” says Mosheim, “ with fortitude and vigour, those that worshipped images;” and in his first and second dialogues occur some remarkable passages, bearing decisive evidence that the doctrine of transubstantiation was not then known to the Church. The Jesuit Sirmond gave at Paris, in the year 1642, a noble edition of the works of this prelate, in four vols. folio. Garnier published an edition in 1648, to which he added a fifth volume. due to our sins : but the blood of Christ only, who was without sin. Well spake Tertullian, If thou hast offended ?n no instance thyself, then by all means suffer for me: but if thou art a sinner, how shall the oil of thy poor vessel suffice for thyself ‘and me? De Pudicitia. cap. 22.*

* Our Author has frequently quoted Tertullian before, and no wonder he should have done so ; for the glory of God, and the increase of Christianity, were the objects which influenced the conduct, and appear prominent in the writings, of that distinguished man ; and induced him to devote his life to the study of the Holy Scriptures; the elucidation of truth; and, generally, the exposure of error. He was a Presbyter of Carthage, born there about the middle of the second century. His father was a Centurion under the Proconsul of Africa, and had his son well educated in all the accomplishments and learning of the Greeks and Romans ; and he grew up intimately conversant, as well with all that was ornamental, as instructive in . general literature. It is uncertain how he was occupied previous to his em; bracing Christianity, though some persons have supposed he was an advocate. His conversion took place not long after the commencement of the reign of Severus, and a little before the conclusion of the second century. Being a man of a strong and vigorous mind, and dissatisfied with Paganism; observing the efficacy of the Christian Religion over the lives and minds of men; considering its great antiquity, as it regarded its main principles through the promises and prophecies of revelation; the harmony and truth of the predictions recorded in the books of the Christians; the frequent testimonies which the heathen deities gave to its truth and authenticity; he, by such means, was brought to profess Christianity. The cruel conduct which, about this time, was manifested towards the Christians by Severus, induced Tertullian to undertake the vindication of their cause. — ‘l’o accomplish this object, he published his celebrated “ Apology,” which has been referred to at page 74, dedicating it to the magistrates of the Roman Empire. In this work, with great learning and eloquence, he pleaded the cause of the persecuted Christians ; complained of the injustice of their enemies, and the methods of their proceedings ; and demonstrated the falsehood of the crimes with which they were charged: he proves the meekness and innocency of the devoted followers of Christ ; their temperance and sobriety ; their piety to God, and obedience to their prince; the reasonableness of their principles, and the holiness of their lives, beyond contradiction. The result of this was very satisfactory, as it certainly, in some degree, mitigated the enmity of the Emperor; and for some time the persecutions ceased. Tertullian also kindly and usefully engaged in writing to the martyrs in prison, to comfort them under their afflictions, and exhort them to perseverance. About the year 205, the Bishop of Rome published a constitution, by which he admitted persons guilty of adultery and fornication to a place among the penitents. Against this constitution, Tertullian wrote his book, cited by Davenant, as above—De Pudicitià. For this he was excommuni-

Verse 15.

In the three foregoing verses we are told of the benefit of redemption itself. In these four which follow we have an accurate delineation of the Redeemer. And the Apostle introduces this excellent personal description of Christ that it may more evidently appear with what security we can repose all our hopes of salvation in such a Redeemer ; and that all other methods of salvation foisted in by seducers ought to be rejected as most palpable fables.

Now the Redeemer is described by a threefold relation :

}, By his internal relation to God ; he is his image.

2. By his external relation to the creature formed ; he is the first-born of creation, its Creator and Preserver.

3. By his relation to the creature renewed, that is to say, to the Church: for he is the Head—the origin, &c.

Who is the image of the invisible God.] The Apostle commences the description of the Redeemer, from his internal relation to God. And here we have to consider three particulars :

1. How many things enter into the consideration of an image, i. e. what is considered to constitute an image.

2. What sort of an image of God, Christ is, or in what sense he is called the image of God.¹¹³

3. Why God, of whom Christ is the image, is called invisible.

As respects the first point: in the consideration of an image there are these three particulars : First, that what is called an image must possess the likeness of some other thing. For if no likeness subsist between them, it is absurd and contrary to all reason to call it an image: for it cannot represent the other; which is the peculiarity of an image.

Secondly, it is required in an image, that that which is properly understood by this term should be in some way drawn and derived from that of which it is called the image. For a mere resemblance where there is no deduction or derivation of the one from the other, does not constitute a proper character of an image: as, for example,’ we do not call milk the image of milk, or an egg the image of another egg; because the one is not derived from the other.

Lastly, it is required, that the likeness which exists between the image itself, and that of which it is the image, should pertain to the specific nature of the prototype, as far as to its participation in, or, at least, its designation of the species. When it pertains to the very nature of the ° species, it is called an essential and natural image, or an image of equality: when it extends only to the outward designation of the species, it is called an accidental or artificial image, or an image of imitation. In the former way, the image of a king is said to be in the prince his son: In the second, the image of a king is said to be impressed upon his coin, or painted on a picture. Having laid down these principles, let us now enquire, What sort of an image of God Christ our Redeemer is, or in what sense he is called the image-of God.

And here a twofold consideration occurs. For Christ is to be regarded either as he was the eternal and invisible image of the Father before the foundation of the world, or as he was the visible and manifest image of the invisible Father, viz. after the assumption of the flesh.

Christ, then, was from all eternity, and always will be, the uncreated Word, the perfect, essential, and invisible image of his invisible Father. Before either angels or men existed, to contemplate this image by mental vision, yet even then, he was the image of his Father:

1. Because he possessed the exact likeness of him, for he was xapaxtnp tis Uwortdcsws “avtou, Heb. 1. 9, the express image of his person.

2. He moreover had this likeness drawn and derived from God the Father through that wonderful and ineffable generation from the Father. For the eternal Father, knowing himself from eternity, begets the Word, the consubstantial image of himself. If any one expects aught from me concerning the mode, he shall have that sentiment of Ambrose: Thou art commanded to believe: it is not permitted thee to discuss, De fide lib. i. cap. 5.¹¹⁴

3. Lastly, it is not a shadowy image of the Father that he bears, in a nature dissimilar, but in the same essence and Divine nature.

It may be asked, How is Christ called the image of God, when he himself is God; for it is impossible that the same thing should be called the image of itself?

We answer, The word God is, in this place, taken with reference to person, not to essence; for it designates the Father only, not the Divine nature in general. Christ, his guilt in such forcible and pathetic terms, as to induce his remorse, contrition, and repentance. Ambrose died in peace at the seat of his Bishopric, at the age of 64, after having been twice compelled to leave it through the troubles and wars of his time. Amidst every other fluctuation, he evinced a simple dependance on the mercy and grace of the Lord Jesus ; and left behind him a bright example of indefatigable exertion, and of zealous de- : votedness to the duties of his sacred calling. His character and conduct, however, have been variously judged of, and as diversely represented, according to the partialities and prejudices of men who have undertaken to — : canvass his active habits ; to scrutinize his ardent zeal in the cause of religion, and on behalf of the church ; or to criticise the numerous writings he left behind him. On a careful and repeated review of every account of this Father which the present writer could obtain, he is disposed to adopt the concluding remarks of Dr. Adam Clarke’s notice of Ambrose and his writings, as affording the fairest representation: ¹¹⁵ Having been bred up in the “ midst of State affairs till advanced in life, his knowledge of Theology must d “ necessarily have been both limited and superficial; hence we find him “ flying to allegory for interpretation—the easy resource of an uninformed “ mind but a lively conception, as requiring no argument to prove it, and “ no study to frame it. His works on Morals are, undoubtedly his best “ performances, and evince the strong conceptions of an upright character: “ in Doctrine he is all that Rome could wish him, and a mysticising fancy “ could make him: as a Disciplinarian he has the noble fortitude of a man “ conscious of rectitude, and yet not austere where circumstances appeared “ to call for lenity, ( Epist, to Sinagrius).” There is reason, however, from the very numerous conflicting opinions respecting Ambrose, to apprehend, that a correct opinion of what he was, can hardly be formed from his works as now extant ; since Papal expurgators and emendators, seeing what might be made of them, may have turned them to as good an account in their favour as Cyprian’s: For what will not Jesuitical policy and authority, intrigue and ingenuity effect, where it has the power and influence, and as the circumstances of the infallible Church require ? Ambrose was a composer of Hymus, and is understood to have been the first who introduced regular choral music into the Christian Church.—Vide “ Clarke’s Succession of Sacred Literature,” and Encyclop. Metropol. under “ Ecclesiastical Writers of the Fourth Century.” therefore, is the image of the Father, not of the Godhead. The person of the Son bears the likeness of the person of the Father; but the Essence or Divine nature in the Son is altogether the same as in the Father: J and my Father are one. Christ therefore cannot be the same in person with Him of whom he is the image; but there is no reason why he may not be the same zn essence.

It may again be asked, Why is the term image appropriated to Christ, since the Holy Spirit also is of the same essence with God the Father ?

To this we answer, Not because he lacks the reality of the Divine nature; for the Spirit is also of the same essence with the Father and the Son: but because the Spirit proceeds by mode of the will, the Son by mode of the nature ; and because he proceeds not from the Father alone, but likewise from the Son; but an image ought to be the representation of one definite person.—These things being explained, let us now deduce some observations from this declaration of the Apostle, Christ is the image of God.

Observe, 1. The error of Arius is disproved, who denied that Christ is of the same essence with the Father: for if he is the image of the Father’s person, he is co-essential with the Father; because a creature cannot be the eternal image of the Creator, but only after the image, through the communication of free endowments.

2. The contrary error of Sabellius is also refuted, who affirmed that the Son is the same with the Father, nor to be personally distinguished from him: but nothing can be more manifest, than that an image is something distinct from that of which it is the image. There is the Father; and there is also the Son, because the image of the Father is the Son.*

3. We are instructed by whom we are to be formed again to the image of God which we have lost; viz. through this perfect and essential image of God, whom God sent tion, and owing to his being encouraged, and his heresy espoused by Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia, and by the sister of the Emperor Constantine, it soon spread. But there were too many in that age valiant for the truth, for adherence to which the Church had undergone ten persecutions ; and such a resistance was made by those who knew the truth as it is in Jesus, to an error so awful as the denial of the supreme and co-eternal Godhead of Christ, that a Council was speedily convened—the first general Council of the Christian Church, viz. that of Nice; at which 318 Bishops, from all parts where Christianity had been established, were assembled, with numerous Presbyters and others, to the number, it is said, of above 2000 persons. At this Council the anti-Christian doctrine was condemned, and that Creed drawn up, which, something enlarged and confirmed at another Council about fifty years afterwards, is held by the Church of England to this day; and in which it is the glory of a fallen sinner believing in Christ for salvation, to confess Him the Redeemer and Saviour, the Son of the living God, one with the Father, co-equal and co-eternal; and the Holy Ghost as the author and giver of life. —’l’he opinions of those who rejected this faith, once delivered to the saints, have undergone material changes since Arius’s time. The two Socini, theological speculators in the sixteenth century, were the chief agents in these mutations; and since their emendations, Christ is held to be, by the followers of men of such superior wisdom, information, discernment, and rationality, not what even Arius taught—* the first and most glorious production of creative power, who, though he had a beginning, existed before, superior to all other creatures, and the instrument by ^ whose subordinate agency the universe was formed ;” but he is sunk in dig. nity and worth to a mere peccable creature, without any existence before his birth of the Virgin, or other prerogative besides the excellence of his moral character, and his mission from the Father; so far does one fundamental error lead to another; those who adopt the first lie generally proceeding further, and raising up other sects that are still more remote from the truth. “ The radical mistake,” as a modern writer of great utility on the subject has justly observed, “ in all these systems, whether heretical or orthodox, “ proceeds from the disposition, so natural in man, of being wise above what “ is written. They are not satisfied with believing a plain declaration of the “ Saviour, *Iand my father are one.’ They undertake, with the utmost “ presumption and folly, to explain in what manner the Father and the “ Son are one; but man might as well attempt to take up the ocean in the “ hollow of his hand as endeavour, by his narrow understanding, to com- “ prehend the manner of the Divine existence.” The great work of Bishop Bull, * Defensio Fidei Nicsenze,” upon which his renown permanently rests, remains a tower of strength upon this point. Bishop Horsley’s tracts dispersed the shadows of Dr. Priestley’s raising. But, perhaps, to those who would have the summary ef the early opinions concisely, but decidedly, ex into the world on purpose that he might renew man, fallen and shamefully corrupted. Only by this image of God can you be conformed to the image of God, says Ambrose, De fide, lib. i. cap. 4.

Now let it suffice to have spoken thus much concerning the Son, as far as in himself he is the invisible, eternal, and natural image of God the Father before the foundation of the world. But Christ must also be regarded as far as pressed, the recent admirable volume of Dr. Burton on the ‘ Testimony of the Fathers,” may be strongly recommended. We cannot, however, but regret, that this able writer should have dismissed a subject of such vital importance, without an exhibition of the practical efficacy of the orthodox system.

Sabellius was an African Presbyter or Bishop, who lived in the century preceding Arius, and gave name to the heresy next adverted to by our Expositor. The notions said to have been maintained by him in systematizing and vindicating errors previously broached, and to account for the glorious declarations of the Gospel and the great Mystery of Godliness which it unfolds, are curious indeed. But his history and opinions are involved in great obscurity. He is generally stated to have held, as the foundation of his heresy, that, (in the words of Bishop Bull), “ God was but one person ; and that there was no real distinction, much less division of persons, in the Divine essence ;” and against this the arguments of Davenant are levelled. The learned Mosheim, however, does not hesitate to pronounce, that “ this is in great part false.” In his ¹¹⁶ Commentaries” he has entered copiously into the whole review of what is to be gathered from the ancients concerning this heresiarch ; and seems to have proved that his heresy has been confounded with that of Noetus. The summary of his investigation is, that “ the opinion of Sabellius is not the same with that of Noetus; for the former did not suppose, as the latter seems to have done, that the person of the Deity was in entire simplicity one, and that it had assumed and joined to itself the human nature of Christ; but that a certain energy, emitted from the Father, or rather a part of the person and nature of the Father, was joined to the man Christ; and that this virtue, or part of the Father, was the Holy Spirit,” (p. 688). —But these, and the above-mentioned errors and subtleties, are not befitting us to dwell upon. They are evidently not to be sustained by the Word of God ; and our Expositor, from that fountain of truth, overturns them at once; and, if the foundations be destroyed, what shall the foolish builders do? It need only be added, that the reader who desires farther information, as to the history and progress of these or other errors, and has not more ample means of obtaining it, or who would find the works mentioned in the preceding article of a literary character beyond his attainments, will in Grier’s “ Epitome of the General Councils of the Church,” and Douglas’s “ Errors of Religion,” meet with suitable satisfaction. he is the visible and manifest image of the invisible God since his incarnation, and that with respect to ourselves, because he represents God to us.

And to this also the Apostle seems to me to have had an eye, inasmuch as he does not barely say, Christ is the image of God, but tov Oecu ‘appdrou, of the invisible God; where an implied antithesis is to be understood; as though he had said, that Christ is now become the visible image of the invisible God. For that substantial image of God shone forth in Christ incarnate, and represented to us, as in a glass, God the Father, when he shewed himself to us in the flesh, as the mighty and present God, and gave us to behold in that flesh the justice, mercy, truth, and power of God. For in the man Christ shone forth the most bright image of the Divine perfection: ‘O eds ’epavepwaSn “cv capui, God was manifest in the flesh, And Christ himself says, John xiv. 7, 9, If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also. He that hath seen me hath seen the Father. Here we behold the Divine wisdom and goodness, for he who is the invisible God proposes to mankind the visible Son and God manifest in the flesh, that by him who is the light, the way, and the truth, we may more easily approach to him who is ?nvisi^le and incomprehensible.

From this most wise Divine appointment we gather, that ] it is not fit for us to know God out of Christ, or, passing by Christ, to proceed directly to God. For this kind of knowledge or approach to God, would rather strike horror into us miserable mortals defiled by sin, than afford comfort.* The sight of God, says Nazianzen, instils fear into men; because God drawing nigh to us convicts the soul of its disease. Orat. 4. [Isa. vi. 5.]

Wherefore, in like manner as they who are unable to fix their eyes on the blaze of the sun itself without pain, may yet look upon its reflex image even with pleasure ; so we who are not able to behold the Divine Majesty in itself, contemplate the living image of it in Christ with the highest joy.

This may suffice concerning Christ the image of God.

It remains that we attend to that last observation; viz. why God is called invisible. And that is to be considered either in respect of the Divine nature in itself [absolutely], or in the person of the Father.

Invisible.’.] First in respect of the Divine nature considered absolutely ; because neither by the eye of the body, nor even of the mind can it be beheld, whilst we sojourn here. Ye cannot see my face, Exod. iii. 20. No man hath seen God at any time, John i. 18. He dwelleth in the light inaccessible, 1 Tim. vi. 16. It is impossible that we should see God with our bodily eyes, because the act of seeing pre-supposes a visible object: but in God there is neither corporeal light, nor colour, nor form; nor, in short, any thing that hath the nature of a visible object. Whence the folly of the Anthropomorphites is evident, who attributed to God a human appearance, and bodily lineaments, not unlike our own.* If God were such, he could not be invisible.

But neither in this life are we able to behold the essence of God with our mental eyes. No one hath seen that ful- . ness of divinity which dwells in God, no one comprehends it in his mind, says Ambrose, in Luke lib. i. cap.1. Which will easily appear if we consider the modes of our knowledge whilst we are in this pilgrimage.¹¹⁷

For we know God either by causality, or by remotion, or by eminence.¹¹⁸ By causality ; whilst we contemplate the Creator, through the creatures of which God is the cause. But notwithstanding this knowledge, the essence of God remains invisible: because an effect shews not the essence of its cause, unless when it is of the same species with the cause, or demonstrates the whole virtue of the cause.

We know God by remotion ; when we consider the imperfections of the creatures, and perceive them to be remote from God; as conceiving him to be immortal, not susceptible of suffering, and incapable of sin. But this knowledge does not extend to the Divine essence : for considerations of remoteness indicate negatively what God is not; they do not shew positively what he is. For no privation belongs to the essence of a positive existence.

We know God by eminence, when, after considering the perfections of the creatures, we ascribe them to God in the highest degree of excellency; thus, because wisdom, strength, holiness, are perfections in the creatures, therefore we judge God to be perfectly strong, perfectly wise, perfectly holy. But neither in this way do we rise to a perception of the essence of God, because none of these things are predicated of God, and of the creature univo- . cally. Aquin. Quest. disput. De simp. div. essen. art. 4.

To this threefold way of knowing God add also that knowledge which we have by faith ; and yet then the divine essence remains invisible. For so Paul himself confesses, J Cor. xiii. 12, We see now through a glass darkly. For faith shews rather what sort of a being God is towards us, than what he is in his own essence. “Therefore God in himself is to us invisible.

2. But we must also add that God in the person of the Father may be said to be invisible by a certain special meaning ; for in this place, the name of God (as we have before suggested) is to be taken with respect to person rather than to essence.

God the Father, then, is called invisible, because (as the Fathers with reason held) he never appeared to the Patriarchs: but the Son, who also was invisible as to the divine nature, chose to appear to them by assuming some created form. So Tertul. in lib. De Trin. et alibi: He who spake to Moses was the Son of God, who always also appeared to the Patriarchs. So Prudentius, in Apotheosi. Whoever is recorded to have seen God, saw the Son sent forth from him. In this manner the Son of God chose, as it were, to give a prelude of his incarnation; the Holy Spirit also we read of as having appeared in the visible form of a dove, and of tongues of fire; but the Father never took any visible appearance, but was always in every respect invisible.

Now the first use of this is, since God hath made it clear that he is invisible, the heathen and papists who worship him under the likeness of man are hence convicted of idolatry. For God himself, inasmuch as he hath not shewn himself. visible, hath decided that he is not to be worshipped under a visible image, Deut. iv. 15. This base idolatry of the Church of Rome, all the Fathers, and some even among the Papists themselves, have condemned. To worship the divine essence in material things, is to dishonour it by the senses, Clem. Strom. 6. No image of him ought to be worshipped, unless that which is the same as himself, August. Epist. 119. it is foolish to make images to represent God, or to adore them. Durand. But they do make them for worship: Cajet. in 3 quest. 25. art. 3.¹¹⁹

Secondly, Since God is invisible to us in this life, and yet our happiness consists in seeing him; we ought to sigh for that other life: and we ought so to frame our life that we may at length attain to the beatific vision of the invisible God. It behoves us, therefore, to guard our heart against all defilement: Blessed are the pure in heart, for they tains “ that the images of Christ, and the mother of God, are to be had and retained, and that due honour and worship is to be given to them.” It was the grossness of this constant practice of image worship—‘ the reverential bowings and bendings of the knee, and prostrations practised before the images and relics in the public worship of the church of Rome,” says the Rev. James Smith, “ that first led me to the suspicions I conceived of the erroneousness of the church of Rome, as contrary to the express words of the Second Commandment.” This took place whilst he was a student in the Romish College at Lisbon, and eventually led to his separation from the church of Rome, and becoming a Clergyman of the church of England. His volume on ¹²⁰ the Errors of the Church of Rome” is a publication well worth attention, containing a fund of information on the subjects at. issue between us and them. This is what constitutes Protestantism. Papists are wont to assail Protestantism as a new Religion, and to brand «s as heretics; whereas true Protestantism is a return to the true, and ancient, and orthodox faith ——’¹²¹ the faith once delivered to the saints,” and from which THEY have swerved. They are fond of reverting, as it respects us in England, to Henry the Eighth’s time. But the case is parallel to tlie one just adverted to; only differing as to magnitude and numbers. As Sharon , Turner in his Modern History, vol. i. p. 573, has well observed: “ All shall see God. Matth. v.8. It behoves us to follow peace and holiness, without which no one shall see the Lord. ‘To conclude, in one word: If any hope or desire dwell in us of ever seeing him who is invisible, always let us bear in mind that of St. John, 1 Epist. iii. 2, 3, When God shall appear, we shall see him as he is: And every man that hath this hope in him, purifieth himself, even as he also is pure.

And so far concerning the comparison of Christ to God.

The first-born of every creature.] Here the Apostle describes the Redeemer by comparison with the creatures, and asserts that he is begotten of God before any creature existed. But in this place it must not be concealed, that these words are expounded in different ways by interpreters.

Some make them apply to the human nature of Christ, and explain the first-born of every creature to mean, the Lord of every creature ; and think the Apostle alludes to the prerogative of the first-born under the Old Testament. For he who was the first-born among many brethren, was honoured by the rest as head: he discharged the office of king and priest in his family: upon him, therefore, the other brothers depended; from him was derived blessing and sanctification to all. Since, therefore, the man Christ is constituted the Lord of the whole world, Psalm viii. and Heb. i.; since by him his brethren are sanctified, Heb. ii. 11, he is most fitly called the first-born of every creature, because he hath the right and prerogative of the first-born over every creature.

Augustine, in many places, applies the word first-born to the human nature of Christ. In lib. De fide, et symb. tom. 3. And against Secundinus, Manich. tom. 6. He is called, says he, the only begotten Son, because without brethren; the first-born, because with brethren. You will not find in what manner you may understand both expressions concerning him with respect to the same divine nature. This sense has no disadvantage, and some embrace it, that they may more easily meet the cavil of the Arians.

But almost all the Greek Fathers, and many of the Latin, interpret the word first-born of Christ, in his divine nature. Therefore they would have this to be the sense of these words: the first-born of every creature, i.e. begotten before any thing was created, reyes wpo áang xticews, because begotten from eternity. Let us adduce a few of their testimonies. Tertullian, in libro de Trin., says, How could he be the first-born, unless because, according to his divinity, the Word proceeded from God the Father before every creature? Ambrose, De fide, lib. i. cap. 4, says, He is called the firstborn, not the first-created, that he may be believed in, as begotten in respect to his nature, and first in respect to his eternity. Chrysostom in this place observes, “Ov wpwrdxtiotos, “a^^ mpurdroxos ; not first-created ; but first-born.

But it may be said, Why is he not called the first-born of God, instead of the first-born of every creature ?

The construction is somewhat harsh, when we explain the first-born of every creature to be begotten of God before every creature: but the Apostle chose to connect the mention of the creature with the eternal generation of Christ, that from thence he might be understood to have been so begotten by God the Father from eternity, as in time to become the efficient beginning, and even the basis and foundation of the whole creation, which, unless it depended upon him, would fall into nothing. !

Thus says Basil,¹²² He is called the first-born of every creature, because he is the cause of creation, coming into existence from things which were not.

But here two things are to be avoided: First that we do not, from its being said that Christ is the first-born in respect of the divine nature, infer, that this ineffable generation took its origin from some beginning of time. Christ hath a beginning of origin, viz. his Father of whom he is begotten: but he hath not a beginning of time; for he is begotten by the Father from eternity. Well spake Thomas, The Son hath not so received from the Father as though receiving afterwards what he had not before: but because he hath his being from the Father even from all eternity: according to that Scripture, The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, Prov. viii. 22. His goings forth have been a diebus eternitate, from the days of eternity, Micah v. 2. — In the beginning, John i. l. “Therefore this word first, when it is spoken concerning God, does not impute a temporal beginning to God, of whom it is affirmed; but only excludes the priority of other things: I am the first and the last, Rev. xxii. 13. Nor hence must we infer that God either had a beginning or will have an end ; but we must from hence deny that any thing either existed before him, or will continue after him. So, when Christ is called the first-born, we are not to infer that therefore he had a temporal beginning of his existence: but we must therefore deny that any thing was co-eval, or more ancient than He. Secondly, we must be aware of inferring with the Arians, from Christ being called the first-born of every creature, that therefore Christ is a creature. For thus they argue; As the first-born of brethren is of the number of the brethren, and the first-born of the flock are of the flock : so the first-born of every creature is of the number of the creatures. Bunt in the passage before us, we must understand ; no numbering of him among the creatures, but only a precedency to them. In the case of first-born, they who are second-born have the same nature with the first; because they take their origin from the same person: But Christ is so termed the first-born, that he is also the only begotten: for he alone is begotten of God the Father ; creatures are not begotten, but created by God. Therefore the first born of every creature, signifies nothing else than begotten before any created thing.¹²³

Christ is the true God, because begotten not made; because begotten before every creature. For whatever exists is either Creator or creature.

Verses 16, 17.

The Apostle proceeds in describing the Son of God by a comparison with the creatures ; and proves and illustrates what he had laid down in the preceding verse, viz. that Christ was the image of God, and the first-boru of every creature ; in other words, that he is the Son of God according to nature, begotten of him before any creature was made, i. e. from all eternity. This he proves by reasoning from the nature of cause and effect: and he shews that Christ is the efficient, the preserving, and final cause of all creation; and on that account prior both in dignity and time to every creature. And this argument he illustrates from the various divisions of creation. But each of these will be more conveniently discussed by following the order of the context.

For by him were all things created.] He here gives the reason why he had termed Christ the first-born of every creature. And his reason, as the Schoolmen will have it, is derived a causa exemplari; from his being the ideal cause, or the cause as a model. And they infer this because it is said, “ev aura, in him; not i “aurdv, by him. And here they philosophize at large about the eternal idea of all things in the Word. Nor, indeed, do we ourselves deny that the Maker of the world, had in himself from all eternity, the plans of all things ready described, so that all things were present to the Word, though not present in themselves. For as the Philosopher says, 7 Metaph. de rebus artificialibus, The form of those things must have exasted in the mind of the workman, before they could have been exhibited in the workmanship ; as every material house is always built according to the immaterial pattern which was already planned in the mind of the architect : so concerning the system of nature, we may with truth assert, that the plan or scheme of all things must have existed in the Divine mind and arrangement before they were actually produced.

Now if in this manner we explain the words of the Apostle, “ev ‘avt o ’enriSn mávro, in him were all things created, we obtain the strongest proof of Christ being prior to, and more excellent than all creatures; inasmuch as the ideal cause is always prior to that which is made according to it. I have chosen to notice this interpretation of the Schoolmen, because there is no fallacy in it: but I am myself much more inclined to the opinion of Chrysostom, and our writers, who regard this expression as a Hebraism, and say that ’ev ‘avr» and 2j ‘avróv have the same meaning, so that the reason is derived from the efficient cause. For this preposition 24 is often taken for per in the Scriptures. Hoc genus daemoniorum non ejicitur nisi in jejunio ;¹²⁴ this kind (of evil spirits) can come forth by nothing but by fasting. So 1 Cor. xii. to speak i» the Spirit, and to receive gifts in the Spirit, are certainly used in each case for by the Spirit [as expressed in our English Bibles]. And I the more willingly concur in this opinion because the Apostle himself says, condita, not cognita ; 1. e. made, not designed; and also because in the end of the verse, resuming what he had said after a long parenthesis, he uses the word 37” avrov, by him, thereby plainly shewing that he considered these words equivalent.

The argument therefore is most valid—Christ is not a creature, but before all creatures ; because by him they were made. For that which makes is before the thing made. 0f only in cause, but in time also, as the Philosopher rightly observes, De part. animal. i. 1.

But here some person may object that we are solving ‘ one obscurity by the introduction of a still greater ; inasmuch as it may be disputed, whether Christ is the Maker of all things, or not.

I answer, The Apostle is writing to the Colossians, not to Pagans, but to Christians; and therefore takes it for granted that they allow Christ to be not a mere man, but the incarnate Word; which being allowed, it follows that he is the Maker of all creatures, John i, The word was in the beginning with God: ALL THINGS WERE MADE BY HIM, AND WITHOUT HIM WAS NOT ANY THING MADE.

That are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible.] What he had just asserted, that a// things were i made by Christ, he now illustrates by a twofold division of things created: the former of which is drawn from the different locality of the things created ; the latter, from their different qualities.

In heaven and in earth.] In this division he comprehends the whole creation. For under the term heaven he understands, as is customary in Scripture, the Highest Heaven, the abode of angels and of the blessed ; the starry sky also, in which are fixed the heavenly orbs; and the atmosphere, in which meteors and other volatile bodies do move : When he says in earth, he means not only all things which are on the surface, but those also which are subterraneous ; such as are laid up in the bosom and bowels of the earth, and in the sea likewise, which surrounds the earth, and with it makes up one sphere, Thus Moses himself speaks, Gen. i. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth: under which two names the whole fabric of nature is comprised.

Visible and invisible.] This is the second division, drawn from their qualities, which also includes all created things. The visible things of heaven are the sun, moon, and stars ; the invisible, are the angels: The visible things upon earth are the plants, the animals, the elements ; the invisible are the souls of men. These, as well as all other things whatever, were created by Christ.

Now this statement that Christ is constituted THE Creator of the things which are in heaven and in earth, visible and invisible, refutes at once the foolish aberrations of many Philosophers and heretics :

First of the Peripatetics,¹²⁵ who fondly imagined that the world must be eternal. Consequently they admit of no creation, but lay down that there is an eternal motion in the heavens, and an eternal succession of generation and corruption in sublunary bodies. But they are convicted of error, not only by the Apostle’s authority, but even by plain reason. For if motion had been eternal, time also must have been infinite. But how then has the whole of it passed away and ceased to flow, if it hath been infinite? for what is infinite cannot pass or flow away. If the heavens have existed from eternity, then the sun has performed an infinite number of revolutions, and an infinite number of years are gone by. But this is impossible, since the days that have elapsed are by the known laws of proportion, greater than the number of years: for no other number greater by a certain and known proportion than that which is infinite is admissible ; for this would of itself evince that both were finite. As to generation and corruption, it cannot be so much as imagined to be eternal, unless it be granted that there is in causes either an infinite progression or circulation. Besides, the possibility of coming into existence, and of going out of existence, is repugnant to every idea of eternity ; but in every thing created there is implied this possibility of decay. These, however, are very thorny topics, nor does an over inquisitive debate concerning them belong to the Theological chair. Justin Martyr, in his Questionibus, and William of Paris,¹²⁶ in lib. de Universo, part. ii. cap. 11, may be consulted on these subjects.

2. As to the dreams of those other Philosophers, who think that the angels were created by God, and this material world by the angels, which error the followers of Apelles have adopted ; vide Tertullian de carne Christi ;¹²⁷ I answer, to create is the work of Christ, and not of angels. For it is an admitted axiom among Divines, that the act of creation cannot be conceded to a creature, not even as the instrumental cause, much less as the principal: First, because in the process of creation, there is a bringing forth from non-existence into existence; but between non-existence and entity there is plainly an infinite distance, impassable to the powers of any created thing. Secondly, because every action of a creature is an accident ; but accident has no admission, except in a subject already existing : therefore the creature cannot possess the creative accident; for then it would possess an accident, when there was nothing in which the acting power could inhere as its subject. Finally, because in creation the entire being of a thing is imparted ; but the entire being is only imparted by Him who is entirely one act; for a finite and natural cause can never form any thing out of nothing. But the authority of Scripture is sufficient for us, which teaches that the whole fabric of the world was made, not by the ministry of angels,-but by the power of the Word.

3. Of the Marcionites and Manicheans, who scout the works of creation, especially those of a material and visible nature, as if unworthy of God’s operation; vide Tertullian advers. Marcion, lib. 1.¹²⁸

The Apostle, however, testifies of these very works, that they were created by Christ; and God himself pronounced that they were in their kind very good, Gen. i. Nor is it true that a thing which is inferior to another, is therefore bad and imperfect, provided it possess all those properties which belong to its species. Therefore, although earthly and material substances may be inferior to the heavenly and spiritual, yet are they in their kind good, and worthy of Christ as their Creator, Even this very world, in that it consists of both substances, is in reality more complete than it would have been, if containing the invisible alone. .

Fourthly, Of the Sadducees and Atheists, who reject invisible substances altogether; for they neither admit the existence of angels or immortal souls. But these rob Christ of the chief glory of creation: for those invisible substances are far more dignified than the visible. They lop off the most noble part of the creation. They oppose the most evident experience, which hath concluded upon the existence both of good and evil spirits, from the various effects that cannot be produced otherwise than by spiritual beings.

Let us, therefore, rejecting at once all these errors, confess that by Christ were ail things created, &c.

Whether thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers.] The Apostle had before asserted that Christ was the Maker of all things, as well visible as invisible : Now he illustrates and extends that assertion by a new sub-division of the invisible creatures. But it must be observed, that the abstract is here put for the concrete: for by dominions, princi-, palities, and powers, we are to understand angels appointed to dominion, principality, and power; that is, governors and princes. I

Melancthon thinks, that under these denominations, not only all orders of invisible angels, but all governments, and the whole range of created things, of civil and domestic polities, are included. According, therefore, to his interpretation,¹²⁹ the Apostle teaches, that all the creatures ] were not only made, but arranged by Christ ; so that those which presided over others, both in heaven and in earth, are still in subjection to him, because all degrees of pre-eminence and command are arranged and appointed by him.

But the exposition of those who apply the terms used in this passage exclusively to heavenly and invisible beings, is both more general and, in my opinion, more just. For thus says the Apostle himself in Ephes. i. 20,21, God hath set Christ at his own right hand in the heavens, far above all principality, and power, and dominion; where without doubt he understands what is heavenly. In the third chapter, indeed, he openly states that sentiment in these words, principalities and powers in heavenly places, verse 10. Let us, therefore, take it for granted that he is speaking of invisible beings.

In the next place, we must enquire what kind of distinction amongst the angels the Apostle has laid down in these words. Dionysius,¹³⁰ and the Schoolmen who follow him, from this and other passages, in which angels are spoken of under different names, so describe their various orders, duties, and properties, as if they had themselves been conversant with heaven for many years, and had learnt precisely their whole polity. And though I have no vast fondness for their fine spun comments, yet, because it is proper for the Divine to be acquainted with the errors of Theologians of any name, I shall give a summary of the points which are copiously handled by them. Hugh de St. Victor,¹³¹ in Sum. Sentent. tract. ii. cap. 5, distributes the heavenly angels into three classes or hierarchies, which he terms the highest, the middle, and the lowest. Each of these he subdivides into three orders. In the highest are cherubim, seraphim, and thrones: In the middle class are dominions, principalities, and powers : In the lowest are virtues, archauge(s, and angels.

Now these titles they are pleased to attach to the angels, as characteristic either of the qualities in which they excel, or of the offices assigned to them by God. Thus they choose to call those Cherubim which excel in the splendour of knowledge; Seraphim those which are most ardent in divine love; Thrones those which contemplate the glory and equity of the Divine judgments. “The Cherubim, they say, enlighten others with wisdom ; the Seraphim inspire with: love; the Thrones teach to rule with judgment. Those of this first class they suppose never to be sent forth to discharge any office, but to wait upon God continually. In the middle class (as hath been said) they place the dominions, principalities, and powers. The dominions regulate the duties of the angels ; the principalities preside over people and provinces; the powers area check upon evil spirits. In the last class they put the viriues, archangels, and an- . gels. The virtues have the power of working miracles assigned to them ; the archangels are sent as messengers in matters of most importance ; angels in those of less consequence. These opinions are collected from Dionysius, from Gregory the Great (horn, in Evang. 34), and from the Schoolmen; and in collecting them together I have followed their more generally received opinions ; for they are by no means agreed among themselves on these subjects ; some of them referring the virtues to the second class, and the principalities to the last; others again opposing this arrangement.¹³²

Our Divines treat this subject with a more becoming reserve. For though they admit these different titles, which are found in this passage and others, as marking distinctions both of order and dignity amongst the angels themselves ; yet, inasmuch as the Scriptures do not explain what these distinctions are, or in what they consist, they do not presume to discuss and define them. So Augustine before them observed, What is the actual distinction between these titles, let those say who can; at the same time, let them prove what they say : for myself I am content to confess my ignorance of them. Enchirid. cap. 58. And in another place, ad Oros. contra Priscill. cap. xi. tom. 6, That there are distiuctions of some kid, I believe, but what those distinctions are I know not. Therefore, passing by these speculations, we will infer the following corollaries :

1. As for the angels, even the most perfect of them, to whatever degree of dignity advanced, Christ is above them all; being himself their Creator and their Disposer. Whence that observation, Heb. i. 6, Let all the angels worship him.

2. Neither the offices of Christ are to be attributed, nor divine worship paid, to the angels ; since they are the servants and creatures of our Redeemer.

3. The different titles by which they are distinguished, do not so much express their inequality in natural dignity, as the difference of offices which they seem to discharge in the affairs of men. For from this difference of offices, some of which are more dignified than others, they receive these titles of angels, archangels, principalities, powers, &c. Nor are we able to state, for a certainty, whether the same angels always perform the same duties, and retain the same titles, or not: indeed, the more probable supposition is, that different names are given them, according to the different offices to which they are commissioned, ‘

But a question remains to be resolved, viz When were these angels created? The Apostle says, they were created by Christ; but Moses does not mention angels among the works of the creation.

Dismissing those Philosophers who insist upon the eternal existence of these spiritual substances, the opinions of Divines on this point are twofold. Some think they were created before this visible world ; and in this opinion almost all the Greek Fathers coincide. Basil says that before this world there was another a3ewpylov ual auordpulov, invisible, and undescribed by Moses,¹³³ on account of the stupidity of the Jewish nation: and he affirms, that in this more ancient world,’ those thrones, dominions, and powers existed, of which the Apostle speaks. Chrysostom and Nazianzen are of the same opinion; and among the Latin Fathers we may reckon Jerome and Hilary.

To confirm this notion, that expression of Job xxxviil. 4, 7, is first alleged, Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth—when the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? By the Sons of ! God they understand the angels, and hence infer their existence before the foundation of the world.

But it is answered, We are not authorised to conclude from this expression, that angels were created before the visible world, but before the earth was founded, 1. e. before the dry land was formed. Moreover, it may be said, that though the angels were created at the same time with the world, yet they might very possibly be enabled to praise the Creator of the world from the first moment of their existence. :

And therefore their opinion is the more probable, who suppose that the anzels were created at the same time with the heaven of the blessed ; and they say that there is a synecdoche (a part put for the whole) in those words of 198 AN EXPOSITION OF $T. PAUL’S Chap. i. Moses, God created the heaven, meaning thereby, both heaven itself and all those blessed existences which that heaven contains :

1. Because the angels are parts of the universe: but if they had been created apart, before this visible world, they must be totally distinct from the order of material creatures, and of themselves have constituted a distinct intelligible universe.

2. Because Moses expressly states, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth; i.e. both those bodies and every thing else which heaven and earth contain : In the beginning, viz. of time or creation, as Lyranus correctly expounds it.¹³⁴ Therefore angels were not created before that beginning. This, however, is more plainly asserted, Exod. xx. 11, In six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and all that in them is: and therefore also the angels. Whence the Schoolmen affirm (Aquin De creat. art. 18), that there are four first-formed and coeval things, viz. the angelic nature, the empyreal heaven, shapeless matter, and time.

3. Because Jude says, verse 6, That the angels who kept not their first estate, but left their habitation, are reserved for judgment. Mere heaven is called the habitation, or dwelling-place of angels; and it is not very likely that angels should have existed many ages without a dwelling-place peculiarly their own. We conclude, therefore, that Moses when asserting, In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth, and the Apostle when affirming that ad/ things were made by Christ which are in heaven and in earth, visible and invisible, had both exactly the same meaning.

All things were created by him and for him, uai sis dvlov.] The Apostle here, by repetition after a long parenthesis, resumes his first position, that all things were made by Christ. On these words, I need add nothing further than my former observation, that ev avro, and 9j avrov are synonimous terms, and are henceforward put one for the other in this resumption of the statement.

The Apostle, however, was not content with the plain and simple repetition of the former assertion; but in order to amplify the dignity of Christ, he adds, that not only . were all things made by him, but for him, or on his account.

For him.] Here then he shews that Christ is not only the efficient, but also the final cause, on whose account all creatures were made. .

But how were all things created for Christ? That they might minister to his glory; inasmuch as they shew forth his Divine power and infinite goodness, and inasmuch as all things are subservient to him. For God does not act from a wish destitute of an end, as men do, but from love of an end to be accomplished, which, as far as is possible, he is pleased to communicate to his creatures. Christ possesses, and in all fulness, infinite glory from all eternity ; but in creating the world he manifested this his glory to us, and laid on all his creatures the obligation of glorifying him. Hence the Psalmist, in Ps. cxlviii. beginning with the angels, runs through the whole scale of creation, and calls upon all to glorify God, because at his word they were created. Christ, therefore, in creation intended this his glory, not indeed as the price of his labour, nor as private advantage to himself; but as being proper, decorous, strictly his due, and beneficial to the very creature itself. For every creature as it hath come forth from God, so it returns to him as far as it can, as Boethius has expressed it in those lines, De consol. lib. iv. metr. 6,

Hic est cunctis communis amor,

Repetuntque boni fine teneri :

Quia non aliter durare queant,

Nisi converso rursus amore,

Refluant caus;, que dedit esse.¹³⁵

Thus translated by Duncan,

* This love to all is common, and they seek

To be confined within the bounds of good ;

Because no otherwise can they endure,

Unless, by love attracted, they return

To that First Cause which gave them to exist.”

Duncan’s Boethius, 1789.

Hence observe,

1. Since all things made by Christ are also formed for the glory of Christ, it is incumbent upon us not to dishonour our Creator, for the manifestation of whose glory we were created. For if that instrument be accounted useless and good for nothing, which does not answer its end; then is that one evil and execrable which is in opposition, and, as far as possible, detrimental to the purpose intended by it.

2. Since the angels themselves were created for the glory of Christ, they must not be so united with him in the work of salvation, as to (detract from, much less) oppose the glory of their Creator.¹³⁶

Verse 17.

The Apostle in this place dignifies Christ with two prerogatives : He is before every creature; and is, as it were, the foundation and support of all creatures.

The point of priority has been explained and proved above ; for we have shewn that Christ was begotten of God, and that the world was made by Christ: each of which proves that he has the precedency of all creatures, as well in dignity as in time. For he whom God begat, must of necessity be both co-eternal and co-essential with God. All other things, as Aquinas properly observes, are such as God was pleased to make them; but the Son is such as God himself is. Now he who made the world must have existed before the world: for he made it by imparting existence to that which had no existence previous to its being created. From these two considerations therefore, both that he was begotten of God, and that the world was made by him, it is proved that he is before all things.

This declaration of the Apostle clearly refutes those who deny Christ to have had a personal existence, tgietamevov, before his incarnation. For how could he have been before all things if he was not before his incarnation? How could he frame all things who was not himself in existence? Tertullian, in Praxiam, says, He who came forth from so great an essence, and made such great existences, could not but himself have a personal existence.¹³⁷

By him all things consist.] This is a new and excellent privilege of Christ, that he not only made all things at first, but that he also sustains and supports them by his Divine energy, in such a manner that, if he should withdraw it, they would again sink into their former nonentity.

This, therefore, is the doctrine of this passage; Every creature, whether earthly or heavenly, visible or invisible, would sink back again into its former nothingness, if the Divine preservation were withdrawn. This proposition of the Apostle is by no means easy to be understood ; therefore we will endeavour to support it both by argument and authorities, as well as clear away what is wont to be advanced against it.

1. No acting force of the agent remains in the effect, when the action of the agent has ceased, unless in some way or other that force be converted into the very nature of the effect, so as to be inherent in it as its own property : but if it be a something transcending the nature of the effect, and a property peculiar to the agent alone, then it must cease when the action ceases. Since, therefore, selfexistence is the peculiar property of God alone, it can remain in no created body, even for a moment of time after , this action of Divine conservation has ceased. Theologians illustrate this argument by comparing the action of God on the creature, to that of the sun on the atmosphere ; for the essence of every creature has the same relation to God, as the light of the atmosphere to the sun.¹³⁸ The sun derives its light from its own proper nature, the atmosphere by participating in the influence of the sun: so God has his existence from his own nature ; all other things by participating in existence from him. As, therefore, the brilliancy of the atmosphere immediately ceases when the bright shining of the sun ceases ; so the existence of every : creature instantly vanishes when God’s conservating power is withdrawn.¹³⁹

2. In reference to God, the action is the same with the preservation as the creation of his creatures; the only difference between them is, that creation exhibits the acting power of God in the original production of a creature ; preservation shews the same action in not deserting the creature when produced. A creature has the beginning of its existence from the energy of God; the continuance of its existence from the same God, not withholding that energy. Durandus, therefore, has not hesitated to assert of every creature, that, as long as it is in existence, so long it is being created by God, because as far as God is concerned, the work of creation and the preservation of creatures is the same. Hence it follows, that by whomsoever all things are formed, by the same also are they preserved ; for preservation is not by a new act, but by the continuance of that act which originally gave existence. Durand. lib. ii. dist. 1. quest. 2.

3. As every work of art presupposes a work of nature for its foundation; so every work of nature presupposes a work of God: for as every artificer borrows his materials from nature, so nature herself does from God. In the same manner, therefore, as the existence of all works of art is preserved by virtue of the natüral substance of which they are composed ; so the essence of natural substances continues by virtue of the preservation of God, who created them. :

4. Every effect depends upon its cause, as far as it is its cause; as a house depends upon the architect for its construction: although for its duration it depends upon the solidity of the wood and stones. The architect is the cause of its having been made; therefore for its making, i. e. for the structure itself it depends upon him: but the nature of its material is the cause of its actual existence ; therefore upon the material it depends for ts durability. Now to apply this to our argument: God is the cause of things, not only as to their formation, but as to their being: In him we live, and move, and have our being, Acts xvii. 98. Therefore all things depend upon him, not only as to their first production, but as to the continuance of their essence; since he is the cause both of the being and also of the formation of all things.

To confirm these arguments I will adduce but two passages of Scripture: The first from John v. 17, My Father worketh hitherto, and [ work. Which passage interpreters apply to this continual operation of God and of Christ in the preservation and government of the creatures. For God rested on the seventh day from making new creatures; but he never rests or ceases from the preservation of, and administration to, the creatures that are made. The other authority is taken from Heb. i. 3, where Christ is spoken of as upholding all things by the word of his power. Which expression intimates that the Divine power of Christ is the support¹⁴⁰ and the foundation, as it were, of all creatures, which would presently fall at once into annihilation unless sustained by him.

And now let us draw some testimonies from the Fathers : ,

1. Justin Martyr, De decret. Aristot. reprehens. says, As that which sprang into existence never would have existed unless God had pronounced his Fiat : so neither would they continue in existence, unless the same God had commanded those things which are not subject to decay, (o stand for ever ; and that those things which spring up and decay, should constantly increase and multiply. Here, by the way, I may be permitted to remark, what I had before passed over, viz. That Christ not only sustains and preserves every individual thing, by the virtue which flows from him, which we have already likened to a continued work of creation: but also, that by virtue of this primary blessing, he propagates the various species of things by successive generations.

Augustine, sup. Genes. ad lit. lib. 4. cap. 13, says, The power and energy of an Almighty and All-sustaining God, is the cause of subsistence to every creature; and if that energy which created them should at any time cease from ruling them, their species would all at once cease, and all nature fall to nothing. If, therefore, we credit Augustine, no creature whatever could exist without this Divine upholding, or manutention, to use the scholastic term.

Gregory, Moral. 16. cap. 18, on those words of Job, xxiii. 19, He alone is, observes, But why does he say, He alone is? All these things (says he) are, and yet fundamentally they are not, because in themselves they have no subsistence ; and unless they were upheld by the hand of their Governor, they would by no means exist. For all things subsist by him who .. created them. Inasmuch as all things were made of nothing, _and their being would again fall into nothing, unless it were retained by the hand which made them all,

Gerson, De vit. spirit. lect. 1. says, As a vessel contains water and gives it its shape, so that it is prevented from flowing away rather by the help of the vessel than by its own nature; so God in his own nature prevents the defectible principle of the creature from acting, and preserves it by his agency from falling back again into nothing.

Let us now meet some objections to the contrary.

1. A created agent communicates to the work made, the power of holding together when his operation has ceased, as we continually see in an architect and his building: Therefore God, whose operations are far more perfect than those of any artificer, must impart this property to his works.

We answer, There is no parity of reasoning. For a created agent is the cause of that work being constructed only, and not of its continuance in existence. A house, for instance, depends upon the architect only as long as it is av building ; but when it is actually built, it depends for its existence, as I have before shewn, upon the nature of the materials. But with God the case is very different; because (as we have proved) he is the cause of the original existence as well as of the formation of all things. It involves a contradiction therefore, that God should communicate to any creature an existence independent of himself: for this would be, in fact, to place it above the condition of a creature.

2 It is objected, There are some created things which cannot but continue, inasmuch as they have in themselves neither the power of assuming a new form, or the contrary; of this kind are all the heavenly bodies: these, therefore, at least, may continue in their state, even if the Divine conservation were withdrawn. -

We answer, The consequence does not hold: because although the heavenly bodies have no natural power whatever of assuming a new form, neither is there any thing external which may effect their dissolution, yet would their very form and substance cease and vanish away, if the. Divine conservation were to cease. For this liability of created things to dissolution (or non-entity) depends neither upon the nature of the material, or of the form, but upon God’s withdrawing his influence. This objection may also be answered by a distinction in the mode of conservation. For there is an indirect conservation, viz, by removal of the destructive principle: this the heavenly bodies do not require, but only the elementary and corruptible . things. As far as this is concerned the objection is allowed. But there is a direct conservation of which we are now treating, through the immediate upholding of the Creator: and of this preservation, both the heavens, and every other being dependant on the First Being, stand in need.

3. They object, Every creature hath an innate earnest desire of its own preservation: but no natural desire is either vain or impossible: therefore every creature has the power of self-preservation.

It is answered, The creature seeks its own preservation, but not to be preserved of itself and by its own powers, but by that very Cause which gave it its existence. Therefore the desire is not vain; for it gains its end by the proper means.

4. It is said, Such is the state of angels and of men in happiness as no longer to require a preserving Providence ; for happiness (as Boethius, lib. 3, De consolat. defines it,) is a state perfected by the assemblage of all good things: but the power of self-preservation is one of those good things especially, without which all the rest are frail and uncertain: therefore the spirits in blessedness have this power, and so do not require other preservation.

We allow that happiness is a state of perfection, and that among the assemblage of blessings in which it consists, the power of preserving itself in this state of happiness must be found. The blessed Spirits, therefore, have this self-preserving power, as far as they have the power of inseparably cleaving to God; but not so far, as that if they were separated from God, they could preserve either their own happiness or existence. If any one wishes any thing further on this subject, let him consult Aquinas, ] quest, 104. art. 1 ; and quest. disput. De conserv. rerum, art. 1; and also contra Gentiles lib. 3, cap. 64.¹⁴¹.

From what has been said we may gather the following remarks for our own benefit.

1. For the support of our confidence; for we may rely fearlessly on this Redeemer, and the preciousness of his blood, who is a person of such infinite power and majesty that he did create all things, and still upholds all things, which would otherwise relapse into nothing.

2. To produce within us humility. For if we cannot retain our natural existence even for a moment without his preserving power, how much less our supernatural and freely given existence? With Gerson (Par. 2) I will unhesitatingly assert; In whatever degree a man is more accomplished than ordinary in natural or gratuitous endowments ; in the same degree is he more liable to fall short and fall away, when this special sustentation by the arm of Christ is withdrawn. We may form a conjecture on this point from the case of Lucifer, Adam, and others, whose perfections, when left to themselves, what were they, but an increase of the weight to their downfall?

3. For persuading us to obedience ; since it is but reasonable that all our life should be devoted to serving Him by whom we were both brought into this life, and are sustained in it. Thus the Psalmist reasons, Ps. c. 2, Praise the Lord with gladness ; come before his presence with a song ; be ye sure that the Lord he is God, for He hath made us, and not we ourselves.

Lastly, let us add this consideration: that these things are not so to be appropriated to Christ, as to exclude either God the Father, or the Holy Ghost, from the preservation of the creature. For, as they said at the creation of man, Let us make man; so could these three persons say, /et us. preserve man. And what has been said of man the same might be said of all creatures; viz. that all were both at first created, and are still preserved by the united operation of the whole Trinity. For that saying of Augustine, De Trinit. lib. i. cap. 4, is most true, The persons are inseparable, and operate inseparably.

And thus much concerning the character of the Redeemer, derived from a comparison of him with the creature . formed : We must come to the last part of this character, derived from his relation to the creature renewed, i. e. to the Church.

Verses 18, 19.

,

We have explained that description of Christ which was drawn from his relation to the cteature in general. It now remains to explain that which is derived from his relation to the creature redeemed, that is to say, the Church. In these two verses he does two things: First, he sets forth Christ by titles peculiar to him, the head, the beginning, the Jirst-born. Secondly, by certain arguments he demonstrates that these titles are his indefeasible right: the first is taken from the final cause, that in all things he might have the pre-eminence ; the second, from the efficient or ordaining cause, for it hath so pleased him, viz. the Father; the last from the formal cause, because in him is ad/ that fulness, which can constitute him the head of the Church, &c. Let us begin by an explanation of the titles; and first let us set forth this of the head of the Church.

The head of the body, the Church] i. e. of his body, which body is the Church; for so the word Church is joined with the word body by apposition. And here there are three things to be discussed by us respecting this head and body.

First, we shall enquire, In which of his natures Christ is the head of the Church.

Secondly, in what respects this title of head is assigned to him.

Thirdly, who they are of whom this body of Christ consists.

As to the first; we say Christ is the head of the Church in each of his natures. For here he is called the head of the Church, who had before been called the image of the invisible God. Bnt that image was the eternal Son of God, the incarnate Word: Therefore Christ, the God-man, is the head of the Church. For the Church ought to possess such a head as might have a natural conformity with the rest of the members to be incorporated in it. Now this conformity suits Christ according to his human nature; whence Christ and the Church are called one flesh, Ephes. v. 31. But it was also necessary that the Church should have such a head as could infuse into it spiritual life. Now this is the province of God alone ; whence God is plainly called the husband and the head of the Church, Psalm xlv. 10, where, under the representation of the marriage of Solomon with Pharaoh’s daughter, the espousals of Christ and the Church are prefigured ; Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear : forget also thy father house: so shall the king greatly desire thy beauty; for he is thy Lord God.

It is, however, objected, That Christ was not the head of the ancient Church in each nature, because he had not yet assumed human nature. But it is the office of the head to impart and communicate its excellencies to the body ; and the human nature of Christ could not benefit the Church before his incarnation; because that which does not exist cannot operate. Therefore he was not the head of ! the Jewish church as to his humanity.

We answer, Although Christ had not yet actually united the human nature to his own; nevertheless, as to the Divine decree respecting his future incarnation and passion ; as to the eternal efficacy thereof ; and as to the living faith of the Patriarchs ; even the human nature of Christ, and that which he was to do and suffer in human nature, although not actually undergone, produced many benefits to the ancient Church. All believers, being elect in Christ, from the foundation of the world, are, through Christ, adopted into the family of God, Ephes. i. 4, 5. God, therefore, by reason of his eternal purpose concerning the incarnation of Christ, even then accounted as members of his body all who believed in him. He was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world ; why not then also the living head of the Church from the foundation of the world? Things are present to God and to faith, which are not present to nature. Aquinas, quest, disp. de gratia Christi, art. 4. ad. 9m. says, That Christ, according to his human nature, was the head of the Church before his incarnation, by the operation of faith, which apprehended his future incarnation ; and so acquired the benefit of justification. But that Divine of Altissiodorum speaks much more clearly, lib. 3. tract. i. quest. 3. de dignitate Christi capitis, &c. He asks, Whether Christ, as to his human nature, was the head of Abel and of the rest of the faithful ; and whether they were members of the body of Christ? He answers, that there was then the same faith respecting his future incarnation, as there now is concerning his past incarnation ; and the same efficacy in their faith as in ours. As, therefore, faith in Christ who is now come, makes a man a member of Christ incarnate ; so their faith in Christ to come, made them members of Christ who was to be incarnate. Christ then was, even as to his humanity, the head of Abel and of the rest of the faithful ; not indeed according to his humanity as actually existing ; but according to his humanity as existing in their faith. For faith looks beyond time. By this faith blessings flowed to them from the fulness of Christ, even as they do now to us. Thus far Altissiodorensis.

But it is also further objected; that Christ is not the head of the Church in his Divine nature, inasmuch as according to that he hath not a conformity of nature with the rest of the members; nor yet according to his human uature, because in respect of that he has not the power of infusing spiritual life to his members: therefore in no way is it the case.

We answer, first, generally; If there be found in the person of Christ the perfect quality of a head, this is sufficient for his being in strict truth called the head, although neither in one nature nor the other, separately considered, all the conditions of headship may meet. To that which was objected concerning the humanity not infusing life and spiritual motion, we answer by a distinction. The life of grace is infused either by the primary agent, who creates grace in the soul in the way of its original source; and in this sense grace flows from the Deity alone; or by an instrument attached to the primary agent; and so the humanity of Christ is said to infuse grace and spiritual life instrumentally. As, therefore, it derogates not from the nature of a corporeal head, because it infuses life and motion to the other members not immediately of itself, but by means of some secret power ; so neither is it any detraction from the honour of the mystical head, that it infuses life and grace, not primarily from itself, but by meaus of the indwelling Deity. Christ is, therefore, notwithstanding these things, the head of the Church in each nature.

You see what kind of a head the Church has; not God alone, nor a mere man; but Jesus Christ, God and man. Hence many observations arise :

1. Whereas the head of the Church is God, we infer that the Church will abide for ever, neither shall the gales. of hell prevail against it ; for if God be with us who shall be against us? A less than God would indeed have been incompetent to the protection of the Church : for the devil, and almost the whole world wage constant war against it. Herein, then, is the consolation of the Church, that Christ, the head of the Church, is greater to protect it, than the devil, the enemy of the Church, is to oppose it ; Cyprian, De exhort. martyr. cap. 10. -

2. If the head of the Church be God, the members of the Church ought, with all fear and reverence, to obey its head in all things. For there is an infinite obligation which binds every creature to obey its God; but that obligation, if possible, surpasses infinite, whereby the Church redeemed and sanctified, is bound to be subject to its God, its mystical and life-giving head.

3. If the head of the Church be God, then the ascension of Christ into heaven bas not deprived the Church of its head : nay, he is present, and will be always present, with his whole Church, by the presence and power of his Divinity, although he may not appear to our eyes by his bodily presence. This he himself promised, Matth. xxviii. ult. 4 am with you always, even unto the end of the world. The error of the advocates for the Papacy, therefore, concerning an earthly head is to be discarded ; who, as the Israelites heretofore said to Aaron, Make us gods which shall go before us, for as for this Moses we wot not what is become of him; so say they, Let us make to ourselves some visible head of the Church, for we know not what has become of Christ.¹⁴² Moreover also, inasmuch as our Head is a man, we infer two things,

1. On account of this alliance of nature, he must of necessity intimately love us, and have such a keen sense of our miseries, as to be most ready to succour us (Judg. x. 16) This the Apostle himself infers, Heb. ii. 17, 18, Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.¹⁴³

2. Whereas our head was a man we have this comfort, that every ground of triumphing over us is taken from the devil. He overcame the first Adam, the head and beginning of the human race; but the second Adam, the head of the Church, overcame him. Nay, in Christ, we who are his members conquer, just as in Adam we were conquered. The victory of our head makes us conquerors,

Thus far concerning the first question, viz. In which nature Christ is the head of the Church.

Now, secondly, it is proper to consider in what respects Christ is called the HEAD. But since this mystical head is so called by a metaphor borrowed from the natural head, the appellation will be obscure, unless we understand in. what respects this similitude between Christ and the natural head, between the Church and the natural body, consists. Well said the Philosopher, Topic vi. cap. 2, A metaphor, by similitude, manifests to us the thing treated of ; for all who use metaphors draw them on the ground of some resemblance they bear to the point to be illustrated. Let us then take into consideration the similitude in the text.

A natural head is regarded in a twofold relation to its . members, that is to say, of difference and of agreement; so also this mystical head: Aquinas, quest. disp. de gratia Christi, art. 4.

The head differs and is distinguished from its members in three ways:

1. In way of eminence or dignity. For the head possesses more fully and perfectly all the senses than the subordinate members: so Christ, the mystical head, possesses all spiritual grace much more abundantly than all other men and angels put together: The Spirit was given to him without measure, John iii. 34.

2. In way of direction or government. For the head E regulates and directs: the members are ruled and directed by the head in their operations : so Christ has the absolute dominion and government over the Church: It obeys his nod, and submits in unreserved conformity to his will. Thus the Apostle teaches, Ephes. v. 22, 23, Wives submit yourselves unto your own husbands as unto the Lord ; for the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the Church: Therefore the Church is subject unto Christ, &c.

3. In way of causality or influence. For the head imparts and communicates sense and motion to all its members: the members are devoid of all motion and sense if separated from the head: So Christ sends forth spiritual life and the motion of grace into his members which are otherwise insensible, dead, and destitute of all spiritual motion. Without me ye can do nothing, John xv. 5; but, on the other hand, J can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me, Phil. iv. 13.

Therefore the appellation of head is most fitly applied to Christ, in respect of all those particulars in which the head must differ and be distinguished from all the members. Now, then, let us consider those things in which the agreement of the head and the members is perceived : And these are three:

1. The natural head hath a natural conformity with the rest of the members: foras the Poet hath rightly said, it would be monstrous and ridiculous,

If a painter should form a design of uniting a horse’s neck to a human head.¹⁴⁴ ! Thus monstrous would it be, if the head of the Church had not a natural conformity with the Church. But Christ hath this, as is shewn, Heb. ii. He took not on him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abraham. — Forasmuch as the children are partakers of flesh aud blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same.

2. The head and the members have a conformity in their destination to the same end, viz. the preservation and safety of the whole person : thus Christ, and the members of Christ, which are one person, are ordained to the attainment of one end, viz. eternal glory and happiness; and to the accomplishment of this end both head and members assiduously co-operate. This is the care of the head, to lead its members to final blessedness. So spake Christ, John xvii. 12, Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost. Hence he is called the Saviour of his body, Ephes. v. 23. This also is the object proposed to all the members of Christ, to attain to the participation of this blessedness together with their head. For what was the purpose and sentiment of Paul, the same is that of all the faithful, One thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press towards the mark, &c. Phil. iii. 4.

3. The head and the members of the natural body agree in the circumstance of their having a continuous union with each other, and all of them deriving their motion and intellectuality from the same soul. So this mystical head, and all the members of it, have a certain mutual continuity, and have their spiritual intellectuality and vivifying principle from the same source. For there is between Christ and all the members of Christ, a certain uninterrupted union by means of the Holy Spirit, who, in all its plenitude, dwelling in Christ the head, being one and the same numerically, is shed forth among all his members, quickening each separately and uniting all in one body. Thus most clearly does the Apostle speak, Ephes. iv. 16, The whole ) body fitly joined together, and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

These are particulars in which there is agreement of the head with the members. And hence it follows that Christ is the true and living head of the whole Church, both in those respects in which the head ought to differ from, as well as in those in which it ought to agree with, its members.

Of the body, the Church.] It remains that we inquire, in the last place, who and what they are, out of whom this body of Christ is composed, which in this place is called the Church.

The term Church is derived from a word signifying to call out; it is therefore an assembly or multitude of those called out: And this calling is effected by the ministry of the Gospel, and other means which God has appointed for bringing men out of a state of ignorance and misery, and leading them to a state of glory. In this sense we call any assembly of men whatever, professing the doctrine and religion of Christ under legitimate pastors, a church. Such were those seven churches to which John sent his Apocalypse; such the Roman, Corinthian, Colossian, and all other visible and local churches. These assemblies are called churches, and those who live in them are members of those churches, and are to be regarded, in the judgment of charity, as members of the Holy Catholic Church, as well because those means are offered to them on God’s part, by which men are called to the participation of eternal life; as because on their part, in outward act and profession, those means are received and employed for salvation.

This external vocation through the proffered grace of the Gospel, and this external adoption and profession of Christianity under legitimate pastors, constitutes the outward and visible Church; and the professors of it are visible members of the Church. But there is also another more effectual vocation joined to this external one, in some persons, namely, by grace implanted and impressed through the power of the Spirit in the hearts of the called; by means of which they not only enter upon the external profession of Christianity, but are joined to Christ himself by the internal bonds of faith and the Spirit: Many are called, but few chosen, says the Saviour.

These things being settled and allowed by the opinions of all, as well Papists as of our own communion, we come to what is before us, and comprise our opinion in this proposition ;—The Catholic Church, which is called the body of Christ, consists of such as are truly sanctified, and united to Christ by an internal alliance ; so that no wicked person, or unbeliever, is a member of this body, solely by the external profession of faith, and participation of the sacraments. We oppose this position to Bellarmin, who, (Lib. 3. De eccles. militant. cap. 2, § atque hoc interest.) ventures to assert, For any one to be called absolutely a member of the true Church no internal virtue is required, but only an external profession of faith, and communion of the sacraments, and union with the Roman Church. Hence he manifestly places among the true members of the body of the Catholic Church, ungodly men, disguised hypocrites, and infidels ; provided they abide in outward communion with the Church of Rome. On the other hand, observe what is elsewhere said by this very Bellarmin.

1. They who stand related to the Church as evil humours to the human body, are not true members of the Church. This proposition is manifestly true: for each sound body desires the preservation of its members; but it does not desire to preserve evil humours, but to expel them. Now they who are void of faith and internal virtues, are, in the Church, as evil humours are in the human body. Bellarm. De eccles. milit. lib. 3. cap. 2.

2. Nothing is truly and formally that which it is said to be, having a diminutive term annexed to it; asa dead man is not truly a man, a city in a picture is not truly a city. Boys know this who have entered only upon the first steps in logic. But the wicked and infidels are not living members of the body of Christ, by Bellarmin’s own concession, cap. 9: nay, he expressly calls them dead members in the I same chapter; where he moreover adds, J say that as it pertains to the design of a member to be a certain part of a living body; a wicked Bishop and a wicked presbyter are dead members, and therefore not true members of the body of Christ. But now mark the dullness of this disputant. The question proposed in the beginning was, Whether wicked men and infidels were true members of the Catholic Church which is the body of Christ, on account of their outward communion and profession of faith? The Jesuit undertook to defend the affirmative part; and now he is compelled to confess, that they are not living but dead members ; that they are not true members so as to answer the purpose of a member. But what is neither living, nor true, nor answers the purpose of a member, how will Bellarmin maintain to be nevertheless a true member? Hearken ; He is not a true member so far as answers the character of a member, but he is a true member as far as regards the character of an instrument. This is mere trifling! For nothing can be understood of which the formal cause is denied ; neither does the genus determine the species.

3. Those whom the Church itself would not acknowledge as members or its parts, if it knew what they are, Christ, who knows all things, does not acknowledge. Nay, Bellarmin asserts, cap. 10, that the Church intends only to collect the faithful, and if she knew the wicked and unbelieving, she either never would admit them, or, if. they accidentally were admitted, she would cast them out. Who, then, in his senses would affirm, that the wicked and unbelieving, whom Christ would condemn, and whom the Church, if she knew them to be such, would cast out, are true members of Christ, and of the Catholic Church ?

4. The Church which is the body of Christ, hath no member which doth not receive a vital influx from the head : for (as we have before shewn) the same Spirit is diffused from the head to all the members: He who hath not the Spirit of Christ is none of his, Rom. viii. 9. But infidels, and the wicked have not this vitality of grace flowing from the head. That which Bellarmin is compelled to answer is childish; viz. Although they have neither an internal union with the head, nor an influx of grace, yet they have external union, which suffices to constitute them true members of the Church, 1. e. of the body of Christ. This subterfuge is vain: for (as Aquinas rightly speaks, quest. disp. de grat. Christi. art. 7. ad. 11m.) Christ and his true members are one mystical person, whence the deeds of Christ, the head, are in some manner those of the members: But that external union neither makes a man one person with Christ, nor a partaker of the obedience and righteousness of Christ ; therefore it does not make him a member of Christ,

5. The same man is not at the same time a member of Christ and of the devil: but wicked men are numbered amongst the servants and the children of the devil, John viii. 38 and 44 ; therefore they are not to be reckoned among the members of Christ.

It is not my purpose to heap together more arguments, or refute those of Bellarmin. I will only add some testimonies extracted from the Fathers and the Schoolmen, that from them ye may be able to see clearly how entirely these novices, the Jesuits, have departed from the truth of the Scriptures, from the authority of the Fathers, and from the doctrine of the ancient Schoolmen.

1. Clemens, Strom.7, cap. 5, says, that the Church is “alpocuoy viv éxrextdv the congregation of the elect ; and a little after, The true Church is one, and in its registry all those are inscribed who are just according to God’s purpose.

Cyprian, De dupl. martyr. In vain does a man mix in the assembly of the saints in the temple made by hands, if he be excluded from the universal mystical body of Christ. Cyprian is speaking of the wicked.

Augustine, De baptis. contra Donat. lib. 4. cap. 2, They do not all belong to the Church who are within its pale, but they who are living piously within it. And cap. 4, In the body of this beloved dove, neither heretics nor the wicked are reckoned. Ad Orosium, quest, 52, As the ark was constructed of hewn limbers, so the Church is built up of the saints.

But let us come to the Schoolmen who also coincide with us in this instance.

William of Altissiodorum, lib. 3, says, As the natural . body of Christ consists of the purest members ; so the mystical body of Christ, which is the Church, consists of most holy believers: and thus the natural body of Christ is the emblem of his mystical body.

Hugo de St. Victor, De sacram. lib. 2. par. ii. cap. 2, says, The holy Church is the body of Christ animated by one spirit, and united in one faith and sanctified : of this body each and all the faithful are members. They are all one body by reason of one Spirit and one faith.

Hales;¹⁴⁵ the wicked are not of the body of the Church, although they are of the Church, parte 3. quest. 12. memb. 3. art. 3.

Gerson, par. 1, The congregation of the Church is united to Christ the head, by the bond of the Holy Spirit ; being joined to him by certain qualifying dispositions which give a lively harmony to this mystical body.

But enough of testimonies. We conclude, therefore, that this body of the Church, of which Christ himself is the head, does not consist of any unfaithful and wicked members, but of the pious and holy alone ; whom God delivers from the power of darkness, and translates into the kingdom of his dear Son. Hence we may learn,

1. It is not sufficient for salvation to be a visible member of any visible church by an outward profession of faith, unless you are a mystical member of the Catholic Church by a true faith and the Spirit dwelling in the heart. What does a treacherous soul in the house of faith? says Cyprian.

2. It is not befitting Christians to envy those who are endowed with the more excellent gifts; because they are members of the same body: what, therefore, is conferred on one, that should be esteemed as given to all, according to that remark of Augustine in Psalm cxxxix. Lay aside envy, and what Ihave is thine; lay aside envy, and what thou hast is mine.

3. Since godly members are of the same body, it behoves them to be ready to assist each other; and they ought to feel equally affected with the good or evil which fall to others, as with their own. So says the Apostle, 1 Cor. xii. 26, If one member suffer, all the members suffer with it ; or if one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with at. Thus far concerning the first title of Christ.

The beginning and the first-born from the dead.] These words are variously read and expounded. In the Greek they stand thus, 4px» vrpurórokos éx tév vexpov. Some, therefore, expound them, The beginning, the first-born from the dead. Others supply the copulative xai, The beginning AND the first-born from the dead: so Beza. Athanasius, and after him Calvin, interpret them by supplying the causal conjunction, The beginning, BECAUSE the first-born from the dead. Chrysostom reads, not 4px», as it stands in our copies, but ámapxn, the first fruits and first-born, &c. But this is of little importance to the main point. For according to all, the Apostle signalizes Christ with these titles to shew that he not only rose first, but that he is to his Church, i. e. to all his members, the beginning and fountain of salvation and of grace in this life; of glory and of blessedness in that which is to come. For the Church hath a twofold state: of grace and of a spiritual resurrection in this life; of glory and of a beatified resurrection in the other: The Apostle, therefore, in this place, declares : Christ to be the author of both.¹⁴⁶¹⁴⁷

Two things, then, are here to be explained: 1. That Christ himself was the first in the glorious resurrection : 2. that Christ was the first in such manner as to be to all of us the cause, as well of the spiritual resurrection, whereby we rise again from the death of sin, as of the corporeal resurrection, whereby we rise to the life of glory. For Christ was both the first in the order of rising as it re- : spects himself, and the beginning as it respects us.

As to the first point ; Christ is rightly called the beginning and the first-born from the dead ; for he alone hath risen as the beginning of his resurrection, raising his body by the power of his Godhead. He also alone hath risen to spiritual life and glory, no more to die. That he rose by his own power, not by that of another, is clear: John ii. 19, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it again, John x. 18. Although, therefore, we read both in the Old and in the New Testament, that some rose from the dead before Christ, this does not strip Christ of these titles; for no one hath risen as the beginning of his resurrection, but all were quickened by the efficacy of another. Besides, none of those arose to the immediate enjoyment 224 AN EXPOSITION OF $T. PAUL’S Chap. 1. of glory, but to the present manifestation of the Divine glory. For truly spake Cyprian, in lib. De resurrectione Christi. These rose indeed, says he, before Christ, but in the name and the faith of Him; one through Elijah when he was living ; one by Elisha in his lifetime, and another after his death ; but then they again returned to death which they had thus tasted. Lazarus also rose at the command of Christ, and some others ; yet all these only enjoyed the gift of life for a time, then again returned to the grave. But Christ beiig raised from the dead, dieth no more, as it is said Rom. vi. 9, The resurrection, therefore, of these few preceding the resurrection of Christ, does not in the least oppose his being called the beginning and the first-born from the dead: since they rose neither by their own power, nor to everlasting life; Christ both by his own power and for ever.

2. Now let us come to the second reason of his being called the beginning and the first-born from the dead ; viz. because he not only, as we have before shewn, quickened himself, and that to life immortal ; but because he is the effective beginning and cause of the rising again of all his members; whether we regard the resurrection to grace from the death of sin, or the resurrection to glory from the death of nature. I join them together, because, although Christ never rose from the death of sin, inasmuch as he never was subject to sin, nevertheless this one resurrection of Christ is the cause of both in us; and these two resurrections are so intimately united, that whoever does not rise beforehand by the power of Christ from the death of sin, will never rise to the life of glory. Let us, therefore, first shew that Christ’s rising again is the cause of our spiritual resurrection.

Christ is the beginning of our spiritual resurrection, by his death and resurrection, 1. as the meritorious cause ; for he merited this spiritual quickening of his members: 2. as the efficient cause; for, by the same power wherewith he raised himself from the dead, he both raises all that are his from the death of sin, and regenerates them to the new life of grace. So says the Apostle, Rom. vi. 11, Reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. 3. Lastly, as the exemplary cause; for the resurrection of Christ is every where proposed to us as a type and pattern of our spiritual resurrection : Like as Christ was raised up from the dead, so we also should walk in newness of life, Rom. vi. 4.

If Christ were not in us the beginning of this spiritual resurrection, there would be no hope of the blessed and glorious resurrection, as it is written in Rev. xx. 6, Blessed is he who hath part in the first resurrection; on such the second death hath no power. For the Spirit of regeneration is the earnest of the blessed resurrection, giving the commencement of spiritual life, and the right to that resurrection which is unto life eternal. Hence Tertullian (in libro, cap. 47, De resurrectione) beautifully says, that by regeneration our bodies are inaugurated for this resurrection. And Aquinas, . in Epist. ad. Rom. upon those words, chap. viii. 11, Jf the Spirit of him who raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by the Spirit that dwelleth in ‘you; says, Our bodies shall be quickened for glory on account of the dignity which they have obtained from the circumstance of t eir having been the temples of the Holy Spirit.

Thus, then, it appears that Christ is the beginning and . the cause of our spiritual resurrection by his corporeal death and resurrection.

Now as to that corporeal resurrection which we expect ; of this also Christ is the beginning, in all those ways which we have touched upon in the spiritual resurrection. 1. As the meritorious cause: For by his passion and victory he won for his people a glorious resurrection : [Je was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification, Rom. iv. 25. But whom he hath justified, he will glorify, Rom. viii. 30. Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God, 1 Pet. iii. 22.¹⁴⁸

2. As the efficient cause: For he himself by his Divine power will raise up all his people to glory ; John v. 28, The hour is coming in which all that are in their graves shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and shall come forth, &c. and 1 Cor. xv. 20, Christ is risen from the dead, the first-fruits of them that slept. Why the first-fruits? Because, like as under the law, the offering of the first-fruits was the cause why the rest of the fruits should be blessed ; so the resurrection of Christ is the cause why the rest of the members shall rise again. I am released from my death; I rise again by the power of Christ, says Prudentius, in Apoth.

Lastly, As the exemplary cause. For the glorious resurrection of Christ the head, holds out to us an example of our resurrection and future glory: He shall change our vile body, that he may make it like to his glorious body, Phil. iii. 21.

It is therefore evident that Christ is most deservedly distinguished with these titles by the Apostle, viz. of the beginning and the first-born from the dead ; as well because he quickened himself to the life of glory, as because he quickens all that are his, both from spiritual and corporeal death.

Observe, 1. From the circumstance of Christ being said to be to us the beginning both of the life of grace and of the life of glory, we conclude that they who are not united to this beginning, are neither partakers of grace in the present life, nor will be of glory in the life to come: but this union is effected by faith and the Holy Spirit : they who are destitute of these will also be destitute of the other.

2. Since Christ is called the first-born from the dead, we understand that death is not now to be feared by Christians; who are entitled to expect by-and-by a certain new and glorious resurrectional birth. For as Christ, on rising again, is called the first-born from the dead ; so all we, after rising again, shall obtain a certain new nativity. He hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance reserved in heaven, 1 Pet. i.3, 4. Death doth not take away life, but rencw’s it, as spake Prudentius wiscly.—Thus much respecting the titles themselves.

That in all things he might have the pre-eminence.] The Apostle is now engaged in shewing that the titles abovementioned belong to Christ by the best possible claim.

Some refer these words to every thing which had preceded ther in his description of Christ the Redeemer: as though the Apostle had said, He ?s the image of God, the first-born of every creature, the head of the Church, the beginning and first-born from the dead, to this end, that in all things he might have the pre-eminence, i. e. that it might be proclaimed to the whole world, that he is the Lord of all creatures, and placed above all things which are either in heaven or in earth.

Others refer them to this last clause, in which Christ is declared to be the first-born from the dead, in this sense; Not only is Christ the Creator and chief of all things . which live, but also, by his death and resurrection, he is the first-born, he that again quickens the dead: this only was wanting to him; therefore, that in all things he might have the pre-eminence, he chose to die, he chose to rise again the first-born from the dead. lf any other had overcome death, and quickened us, then Christ would not have had the pre-eminence in all things; for that other would have been the chief in respect of the dead. .

Here it is proper to remark the wonderful wisdom of the Apostle in divine things, who, in the death of Christ, which appeared full of infirmity and ignominy, finds an argument for augmenting his glory and majesty. For although this circumstance of. dying, if considered in itself, is a mark of infirmity; yet for any one so to die, as to raise himself again, as to deliver all others from death, by the power of his death and resurrection, 1. e. to be the beginning and the first-born from the dead, is pre-eminently honourable and glorious.

Verse 19.

The Apostle still proceeds in confirmation of those titles which a little before he had bestowed upon Christ. But in this verse there are two reasons complicated and involved together, which we shall separate for the sake of perspicuity. The first is taken from the efficient, or ordaining cause, in this manner; 7¢ pleased God THE FATHER (for these words must be supplied) that Christ should be the head of the Church, the first-born from the dead, &c. therefore, on the best possible ground, we attribute these titles to him. So Peter, Acts ii.36, said, Let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus both Lord and Christ: i.e. God the Father himself hath given the Church to Christ, and in turn Christ to the Church, and hath constituted him its head and Saviour, by his eternal ordinance.

But how was this good pleasure of God made evident to Paul, or how can we be assured of it?

1. From the testimony of God himself in his word ; for Moses and the Prophets bear testimony to Christ the Redeemer. Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me, John v. 46, &c. 2. From the whole life of Christ, from his death and resurrection; in all which his Divinity shone forth, and proclaimed to the whole world that he was sent from God the Father, to gather together the Church, and accomplish the salvation of man.

It is not without just reason that the Apostle, in speaking of the Redeemer of the human race and the head of the Church, puts us in mind of the good pleasure of God; because no one could take this honour to himself without the Divine will and decree. For which reason God himself revealed this his good pleasure by the prophets, as in Isaiah xlii. 6, I the Lord have called thee, and have given thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles. And Christ himself, on every occasion, enforces this decree of God, and this his mission from God the Father, Luke iv. 18, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me, ‘he hath sent me to preach the Gospel to the poor, to heal the broken-hearted, &c. Isa. lxi. 1. And John iv. 34, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me.

Two things are to be noted here:

1. That salvation and grace are not to be sought in any other than in Him in whom it hath pleased God they should be sought. But concerning his will respecting it, we are to judge from the word of revelation, In the whole business, therefore, of our salvation, this thought ought always to be present to Christian minds, What is the good pleasure of God? For if we turn aside from his will, in. vain do we expect any good. For example: I desire the remission of sins, or deliverance from some impending evil, or some spiritual grace: I hesitate about what must be done to obtain the object of my desire: The orthodox direct that I should flee immediately to Christ, and plead his intercession alone with the Father ; the Papists direct that I should flee to the blessed Virgin, or to other saints. Here, then, what is to be done? You must enquire, What 3 hath been the good pleasure of God the Father? You must obey his will. We easily shew you that it hath pleased God that we should use the intercession of Christ our head: but the whole tribe of Papists never will prove from the Scriptures, that it hath pleased God that we should approach him by the mother of Christ, or through the saints.

2. Since it hath pleased God that Christ should be our perfect and absolute Redeemer, it is manifest that they undermine the eternal purpose of God, who have devised new modes of salvation, of which it cannot be said, that it hath pleased God we should seek remission of sins by them. Hither we may refer human satisfactions, papal in dulgences, and whatsoever is blended in the business of salvation without the ordinance of the Divine will. All these, as much as in them lies, set aside the eternal decree of God respecting human salvation.

2. All fulness dwell.] This is that other reason why Christ is most properly called the head of the Church ; and it is taken from the formal cause, in this manner; God, whom it pleased that Christ should be the head of the Church, not only so ordained by decree, but, besides, furnished him with all the gifts which were requisite to render him the suitable head of the Church. This title, therefore, most especially befits him.

By fulness in this place some understand a fulness of Deity ; others, a fulness of habitual grace.¹⁴⁹ It is certain each fulness dwells in Christ; and perhaps the Apostle desired to comprehend each. For doubtless he asserts, that there is in Christ whatever is requisite to render him the perfect Redeemer of mankind, and /Ae head of the Church: but for undertaking these offices, both a fulness of Divinity anda fulness of habitual grace are requisite. Concerning the Deity of Christ we have before spoken: of the fulness of habitual grace we shall only shew these three things briefly.

1. That this fulness of grace was in Christ.

2. Adduce some reasons why it was befitting that a fulness of grace should be in Christ. : 3. We will shew that this fulness of grace was the privilege of Christ alone.

1. As to the first; when we say that there was in the man Christ a fulness of habitual grace, we mean not that this grace was infinite: for, since it is a created quality, and is inherent in the soul of Christ, which also was created, it cannot be infinite. But by the fulness of grace we understand all those perfections to which the term grace extends itself. For whereas a certain measure of grace is found in other men, so that one man may be endowed with some gift of grace in which another is wanting; in Christ there is a concurrence of all the gifts of grace. Besides, whilst other men obtain grace in an inferior measure ; Christ not only possesses all grace, but also hath it in the highest degree. Whence some say that this habitual and infused grace of Christ, may in some sense be termed infinite : viz. inasmuch as it is not limited in kind or degree ; but contains in itself whatever falls under the term grace : As if any one should say the light of the sun is infinite, not as far as regards the essence of that attribute, but as far as the nature of light alone is considered; because whatever appertains to light is found in the solar light in the highest degree. But this is an incorrect mode of speaking. The Scriptures every where affirm this fulness of grace to be in Christ, John iii. 34, The Spirit was given to him without measure. In him are all treasures, Col. . Wi. de

Ye see then that all fulness of grace is in Christ.

2. Now, in the second place, let us consider, Why it was necessary this fulness of grace should be in Christ. First, the fitness of things required it, on account of the union of his soul to the Word. For it is just and proper that in proportion as any thing is nearer to the influential cause, so much the more abundantly should it partake of . the influence itself: Since, therefore, God himself is the fountain of grace, the soul of Christ, so near to God, cannot but abound in grace. Secondly, necessity requires it, from consideration of the end, on account of the relation of Christ himself to the human race. For grace was to be bestowed on him notas ona private person, but as the universal fountain from whom it might be transfused into the rest of men. But in this fountain all the parts ought to be full and combined. The Evangelist shews that grace is shed abroad in us from Christ, John i. 16, Of his fulness have all we received. And the Apostle, Ephes. iv. 7, To every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.

3. It remains that we shew, in the last place, that this fulness of grace is peculiar to Christ alone. To prove which we employ this one argument. — In the saints miitant here on earth there is not a fulness of grace; for it cannot consist with so many remains of the old man as are found in them: for a fulness of grace leaves no room for sin. But not even in the very saints triumphant is there this perfect fulness of all grace which is in Christ: For if one star differeth from another star in light and magnitude, then how much more does it differ from the sun? All the blessed have the greatest measure of grace and glory which the mind of each individual can contain ; but the mind of any mere creature hath not that capacity, either of grace or of glory, which Christ hath. There is fulness in him alone.

But an objection is raised, that the Virgin Mary, for instance, is said to be full of grace, Luke i 28; and Stephen also full of grace and power, Acts vi, 8: and that therefore a fulness of grace is not peculiar to Christ.

I answer, the fulness of grace is twofold: One may be regarded on the part of grace itself, when a man hath it in the greatest extent, both as to every kind of grace, and in the greatest perfection as to degree. This is the fulness of Christ alone. The other regards grace on the part of the possessor, when a man hath it as fully and as sufficiently as his state and condition can contain: And thus a fulness of grace is compatible to Mary, Stephen, and others : For the Virgin Mary had full and sufficient grace for that state and condition to which God had chosen her.

And thus briefly have we dispatched those three points which we proposed to explain: That all fulness of grace was in Christ; Why all fulness ought to dwell in Christ ; and that this fulness is found in Christ alone.

Hence observe, that God is not accustomed to impose an office upon any one, without at the same time, conferring upon him all those powers which are necessary for the discharge of it: He lays upon Christ the office of head of the Church; but he also imparts to him a fulness of grace. Therefore, whoever thrust themselves into offices, for the administration of which they are altogether incompetent, are not called to them by God, but are impelled either by avarice or ambition.

2. For any one to be accounted the head of the Church, he must-necessarily have a fulness of grace. In whom this fulness is wanting, it is well with him if he be numbered among the members of the Church; he cannot assume to himself the name and the honour of head without the greatest arrogance or folly, as Gregory hath shewn, Epist. lib. 1. epist. 82.

3. Since there is a fulness of grace in Christ alone, we must expect its streams to flow to us from him alone: they who seek grace elsewhere commit two evils ; they forsake the fountain of living waters, and hew them out cisterns, broken cisterus that can hold no water, Jer. ii. 13.

And now we have gone through the description of Christ our Redeemer.

Verse 20.

Our Apostle has, up to this point, been occupied in explaining the doctrine of Redemption. The blessing of redemption itself he has slightly glanced at in verses 12, 13, 14. From that 14th verse to this place, he has described the Redeemer, and dignified him with various titles. Here, in this verse, and the two following, he again returns to the subject of redemption, and more copiously expounds the mode of it, having before but briefly touched upon that topic. But of the work of redemption, or reconciliation, he speaks first, generally, as far as it relates to all, in this verse: then, in the two following, specially, as far as it pertains to the Colossians themselves.

Now in the words before us there are many things to be observed :

1. That the reconciliation is effected.

2. By whose decree and authority it took place.

3. With what it was effected.

4. By whom.

5. In what manner.

6. On whose behalf.

1. The Apostle takes it for granted that the work of reconciliation is accomplished. He does not, therefore, apply himself to prove that mankind is reconciled to God, but to present to our view the very method of reconciliation. Now to reconcile is nothing else than to renew a friendship broken asunder by some grievous offence, and so to restore the parties at enmity to their former concord. And here we must bear in mind, that, before the fall, all rational creatures were in close familiarity with God ; but by that apostacy there took place, as it were, a violent separation of the creature from God, and a turning away of God from the creature: so that the same God who had loved man, when created, as a son; hated him, when fallen and corrupted, as a traitor. But notwithstanding this fall of man, and this hatred of sin on God’s part, it pleased God to reconcile fallen man to himself.

From this certain persuasion of reconciliation being accomplished, arises our great consolation in that spiritual struggle which the conscience experiences under the horror of sin.¹⁵⁰ For if we had to treat with a God hostile to us, who, under the load of so many sins, could raise his eyes towards heaven? who could think think on the Divine Majesty without trembling? But when we recollect that we have to do with a God propitiated and reconciled, we approach the throne of mercy with great confidence. For he will not deal with us in strict justice, as with enemies ; but, as if treating with friends and children, he will pass by our sins, he will call to remembrance his fatherly pity and compassion ; and that, indeed, because the reconciliation is accomplished.

2. In the second place it is to be inquired, By whose decree, counsel, and authority this work of reconciliation hath been undertaken and accomplished? We answer at once, that it was done by the authority and appointment of God the Father. This we gather from the connection of this verse with the preceding; It hath pleased him (that is to say, the Father) that in Christ should all fulness dwell ; And by him to effect the reconciliation. Here, therefore, it is also proper to substitute that word ’svdéxnes, it pleased the Father to reconcile, &c.

In many other places the work of reconciliation is ascribed to God the Father: But that remarkable one, 2 Cor. v. . 18, 19, contains the sum of them all, God hath reconciled us unto himself: God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself. Although, therefore, (as we shall presently shew) the work of reconciliation is attributed to Christ, as the proximate and immediate agent; yetitis proper to ascribe it to God the Father; and, by consequence, to the whole Trinity, as the primary cause: For the whole Trinity, which foresaw from eternity the fall of the human race, pre-or- , dained this way of effecting reconciliation by Christ, and inspired the man Christ Jesus with the will to suffer for the redemption of mankind. So it is said in Isaiah xlii. 6, I, the Lord, have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, &c. In which place the prophet teaches us, that Jehovah himself had ordained and called Christ to this work of reconciliation, and strengthened and upheld him during his whole accomplishment of human salvation. It is evident, therefore, that God was the primary author of this reconciliation, and was induced to devise this plan of our redemption entirely from his own good pleasure, and from free love. The Apostle here employs this particular term ’evddunce, It pleased him well. And in Jeremiah xxxi. 3, we read, I have loved thee with an everlasting love. And in all parts of Scripture, this gratuitous love of God is declared to be the cause why the Father sent his Son into the world to obtain salvation for us, John iii. 16, God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son. And in Ephes. i1. 4, 5, For his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead insins, hehath quickened us, &c. — For, as Altissiodorensis well observes, love is the first gift in which all others are given.

But here a doubt meets us concerning this eternal love of God. For it may be asked, What need was there of reconciliation, if God loved us from eternity ? since reconciliation is not needed among friends, where there are no enmities.

We offer an answer from the venerable Bede :¹⁵¹ Thus, says he, in Rom. v. God loved us in a wonderful manner, whilst he hated us: in every one of us he hated what we had done; he loved what he himself had done: i. e. as the Schoolmen say, he loved the human race as far as respects the nature which he himself had made ; but he hated it as far as respects the guilt which men had contracted. Therefore the love of God towards the being created by himself, moved him to devise this reconciliation : the hatred of God towards sin, prohibited by him, but committed by us, subjected us to the necessity of reconciliation. Aquinas, therefore, 3 quest. 49. art. 4, rightly states the matter ; We are not said to be reconciled, as though God began to love us anew ; for he has loved us with an eternal love: but because by this reconciliation all cause of hatred is removed, as well by the remission of sin, as by the re-payment of a more acceptable good.

Hence we are taught that our salvation is not the wages of our merit, but the free gift of God. For this original decree of human redemption proceeded from evdoxfa Divind, the good pleasure of God, and from his eternal love, whereby us, who were fallen and sunk in sin, he hath voluntarily saved and reconciled to himself: according to that saying of Ambrose in Epist. 11, God called us to salvation when we’ were straying from him, and not even desiring the right way; and Paul to Titus, ii. 11, The grace of God which bringeth salvation, appeared unto all men,’Ezepdmn n xápig ; as it were, shone upon us suddenly and unexpectedly, when we were neither seeking or looking for such a thing.

3. Let us proceed, and see, in the third place, to whom we are reconciled. To himself, says the Apostle, i.e. to God the Father, and, consequently, to the whole Trinity. So he speaks in many places: Rom. v. 10, When we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son : and in 2 Cor. v. 19, God was in Christ reconciling the world: To whom? To himself. It is plain we must understand in these places, by the word God, God the Father, because of the correlative Son which is subjoined.

But here we must beware not so to consider ourselves reconciled to God the Father, as to deny that we are reconciled also to the Son and to the Holy Spirit. For since all sin is committed against the Divine Majesty, it follows of necessity, that the three Persons who possess the same . essential Divinity, and were equally offended by the commission of sin, should be equally appeased by the expiation and remission of it.

But two reasons are assigned by Zanchius,¹⁵² (De trib. Elohim,) why the Scriptures usually teach that we are reconciled to the Father, rather than to the Son or the Holy Spirit. First, Because the Father is the fountain of the whole Godhead, and of all the Divine counsels and operations : on which account also it happens, that he is, in order, the first of those against whom our sin is committed ; and, in order, the first of those to whom we are reconciled. Scripture therefore usually states, that we are reconciled to the Father, rather than to the Son, or the Holy Spirit, that it may indicate the fountain whence reconciliation flows, and against whom sin is first committed. The other reason is, Because the Scriptures would point out the peculiar office of each Person. For although the acts of the Trinity are ad extra indivisible, yet certain of them are appropriated to each Person peculiarly. It is, therefore, the property of the Father, as the fountain from whence grace flows, to receive us into favour: and hence the Scriptures are wont to say, that we are reconciled to the Father. It is the property of the Son, as Mediator, to intercede, and fully to pay avtpo, the ransom-price of reconciliation : hence they say that we are reconciled by the Son. It is the property of the Spirit to set the seal to this confidence of reconciliation in our hearts. We are reconciled, therefore, to the Father, and we are reconciled also to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, inasmuch as they are one God in three Persons.¹⁵³

But here it is objected: If Christ reconciles us to the whole Trinity, then he reconciles us to himself: but no one is called a Mediator in regard to himself, but with reference to another.

I answer, The Son must be viewed in a twofold light: In one with reference to the Divine essence and nature, in ‘ regard to which he also is offended: in the other with reference to the Divine economy, whereby this Person, although offended, was willing to take human flesh, and, by a voluntary engagement, to be the medium of reconciliation between God and men. The same Christ, therefore, received the sacrifice of reconciliation, as God offended in his nature ; but he offered it as Mediator, the God-man, in the Divine economy, or voluntary dispensation of grace.— . This is the opinion of Junius.

Ye now understand to whom we are reconciled, viz. to the whole Trinity. Let us then enquire,

4. In the fourth place, by whom this reconciliation is effected. By him, says the Apostle; i. e. By him whom he had before called the image of God, the first-born of every creature, the head of the Church, endowed with all the fulness of grace; by Christ Jesus, the incarnate Son of God. There is none other name under heaven whereby we can hope to be saved, Acts iv. 12. No creature either could or ought to reconcile us to God; not an angel; nor a mere man; but Christ the Ozavépwxos—the Son of God. An angel could not reconcile us, because the rule of Divine justice required, that satisfaction should be given by the same nature that had sinned and was to be delivered. Neither, indeed, was it fit that man should owe his salvation and redemption to any other than to him to whom he owed his creation. Bernard, De passione Dom. cap. 46, gives as a reason, Because redemption more excites us to love than creation. If, therefore, we had been redeemed by any other than he who created us, we should have loved him more than our Creator. I even affirm, finally, that an angel could not perform this work. For an angel owes to God whatever he hath, and can do on his own account: he has no superabundant merit, which he can afford to expend for the redemption of man. But if an angel could not effect this work of reconciliation, much less could a mere man, guilty of sin, and obnoxious to Divine wrath. For, as the Apostle says, Ephes. ii. 3, All are by nature the children of wrath. Nay, if we could suppose any man entirely free from sin, he nevertheless would not be a fit redeemer and reconciler for mankind. For the redemption and reconciliation of the human race requires a mediator whose obedience is of infinite merit, whose humility is as pleasing to God as the pride of our first parents was displeasing. But the obedience of any mere man, however holy, is due and required by God; is finite, and hath nothing whereby it . can answer for and expiate an infinite offence. “Therefore Christ alone, the God-man, could and ought to reconcile us to the Father: he alone could, in respect of his Divine nature: he ought, in respect of his human, which he assumed for that very end, that he might deliver man and bring him back to God. Whence the Church, Acts xx. 28, is said to be purchased with the blood of God.

Hence we infer, that Christ alone is the bond of our union with God; so that, out of him, we are miserable, because not yet reconciled to God.

Hence also we refute their error who seek reconciliation with God either by the aid and intercession, or by the merits of angels or of saints. For since Christ is called our reconciler, this title, even as all the former ones, is to be understood exclusively and by way of contrast, as though the Apostle had said, He, and no one besides him, is the head of the Church; He, and no one besides him, is endow ed with a fulness of grace; He, and no one besides him, hath the office of reconciliation assigned to him by God the Father: By Him, and by Him alone, it hath pleased God to reconcile all things to himself.

5. Now let us consider, fifthly, how Christ hath reconciled us to the Father: Having made peace, says the Apostle, through the blood of his cross, i. e. through the blood shed on the cross ; or, through that bitter and bloody death which he endured on the cross.

Two things, then, are here to be discussed :

1. Why God willed peace and reconciliation should be made through the blood and death of his Son ; and

2. Why by the death of the cross.

As to the death of Christ considered in itself: Some other possible mode of redeeming mankind was not wanting to God; but no one was more congruous than this, as - Augustine writes, De Trin. lib. 13. cap. 10. This mode was the most consistent with respect to God, because it accorded as well with the Divine justice as with the Divine mercy. God shewed his justice in exacting a full satisfaction; the death of an infinite person for infinite guilt. He shewed his mercy, in exacting it not from us miserable creatures, who were incapable of paying it, but from Christ, ] who could pay it. But when we say that another mode of reconciliation was possible, we wish to be understood as speaking of absolute possibility, as it respects the nature of the thing itself: For if it had seemed fit to God, he could have forgiven man all his sins without accepting any ransom ; or he might have been content with the least measure of suffering from Christ, although he had not yielded himself to death. But if we regard the eternal decree of God, concerning the deliverance of mankind by the death of his Son, then, upon this hypothesis of the Divine pre-ordination, the death of Christ was necessary to human redemption : for it is impossible either that the Divine fore-knowledge should be deceived, or that the Divine decree should be changed. Hence that prayer of Christ to the Father, Matth. xxvi. 42, Father, if this cup may not pass from me except I drink it, thy will be done. The event shewed it could not: not because it was absolutely

VOLT. R impossible, but because God had decreed from eternity, that the benefit of our redemption should arise from the passion and death of Christ; which decree it was impossible to abrogate.

But even as to us, Divines are used to adduce many reasons to prove that this mode of redeeming mankind by the death of Christ was most congruous. And, in the first place, they lay down this principle, That any mode is more suitable and adapted to the attainment of any end, in proportion as there is in it a greater concurrence of expedients to that end. This being admitted, it is easy to shew that in this mode of redemption by the death of Christ, many expedients concur which must altogether contribute to advance our salvation.

1. By this death of Christ, man most clearly discovers the infinite love of God towards him, and is thus inflamed to love God in return, than which nothing more conduces to human salvation. So says the Apostle, Rom. v. 8, God commendeth his love towards us, in that whilst we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Now, truly, upon this view of the love of God, ungrateful and inhuman is that man who is unwilling to return that love.

2. By this death of Christ we are constrained both to avoid and to abhor sin. For that must of necessity be deadly which could be healed in no other way than by the death of Christ. Who, then, seriously reflecting that his sins could not have been expiated in any other way than by the blood of the Son of God himself, does not shudder to trample under foot this most precious blood by his daily trangression ? as the Apostle speaks in Heb. x. 29.

3. By this death of Christ, an example of righteousness, humility, obedience, patience, and of all virtues, is set before us. For the godly rejoice to suffer for righteousness sake, when they reflect that Christ Jesus, the Captain and Author of their salvation, underwent death itself. For as it is honourable of the soldier to drink of that cup which his general had tasted before him ; so is it to Christians, to taste of that cup of affliction which Christ himself drank of for them. Therefore this mode was. most suitable, because it especially excites to the love of God, to hatred of sin, and to the practice of godliness.

But now it remains for us to shew why he chose to suffer this ignominious death of the cross; for both in this place, and frequently elsewhere, this is urged by the Apostle, as in Phil. i1 8, He became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. This kind [of death] not only serves to aggravate his sufferings, but also to confirm our faith.

1. This kind of death shews that Christ took upon himself the curse which was due to us, and freed us from the same: for God hath therefore pronounced the death of the cross accursed, Deut. xxi. 23, because he had determined for our deliverance to inflict this shameful kind of death upon his Son. The words of the Apostle, Gal. iii. 13, refer to this; Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law,” being made a curse for us: As it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth ou a tree.

2. Because this kind of death corresponded to many types and figures. For the sacrifices which prefigured Christ were placed upon wood, and were raised aloft before they were burnt. The brazen serpent, suspended upon a pole, shadowed forth, according to Christ’s own interpretation, his crucifixion ; As Moses lifted up the serpent in the . wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, John iij. 14. J, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto me, John xii. 32.

3. That the pious may understand from thence, that no kind of death for righteousness sake is shameful, or to be dreaded by those subjected thereto. For many who by no means dread death itself, yet shun it when coupled with shame and ignominy: but the cross of Christ arms his disciples against this fear; which was manifest in the martyrs, who avoided not death, however ignominious.

To these reasons we might add others from the Schoolmen ; which we shall only name, because they seem partly trifling, and partly too curious.

Because Adam sinned by the fruit of the forbidden tree, therefore this second Adam was willing to suffer punishment upon the tree of the cross.

Because by being lifted up at his death, he seemed to prepare an ascent for us into heaven.

Because being stretched upon the cross, he seemed to call the whole world £o look for salvation hidden in him.

Because, by his blood running down upon the earth, he would not only purify the earth; but also by his body hanging in the air, he would purify the air.

This, and much more of the same kind, occurs in Aquinas, part. 3. quest. 46. art. 4.

All things, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.] In this work of redemption it is, in the last place, to be considered, how widely this benefit reaches, how far its virtue and efficacy extend. Jt pleased God, says the Apostle, by him to reconcile all things, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.

This passage is very difficult to be explained : interpreters, therefore, torture it, and are in return themselves tortured by it. In the first place, we must admit that the Apostle is speaking of the efficacy of the reconciliation made by the blood of Christ, as far as this ransom is considered in itself, and in its peculiar value ; as far also as the benefit of it is offered to all, by the preaching of the Gospel on the part of God : for he must not be understood as speaking of the actual reconciliation of particular persons; since many are not reconciled to God by the blood of Christ, for want of application.

But yet a doubt remains, on account of the Apostle’s distributing his sentence into two members, derived from the places spoken of. He says that God willed to reconcile all things to himself by Christ; and then he employs this division, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. It is asked, in what way does reconciliation relate to heavenly things? for where there is no sin, where there is no breach, there needs no reconciliation.

Chrysostom expounds this passage of the angels; whom he states to have been our enemies by reason of the fall and rebellion of man against God their Lord, but to have been made friends and well-disposed towards us after we were reconciled to God by Christ. And in this sense he supposes Christ to have reconciled the things which are in earth and which are in heaven. But this interpretation does not remove the difficulty. For although it be true that the angels became more kind towards us from the period when we were redeemed by Christ; yet the Apostle does not speak of that in this passage ; but he manifestly speaks of a reconciliation of earthly and of heavenly things which is made to God, not which is effected between themselves : It pleased him to reconcile to himself, &c.

Others, by all things which are in heaven, understand all the faithful who died before Christ’s passion; and by the all things which are in earth, all the rest of the faithful. But it is not at all likely that the Apostle regarded men alone: for he would then have said, “sve v004 ea? tS n5, “eie, Tos ev rois Gupavois, whether they be persons in earth or in heaven; and would have used wavrag, all persons, not warla, all things.

The Apostle, therefore, seems in this distribution to have intended to comprise divers objects, viz. men and angels ; nay, the whole fabric of the heavenly and earthly creation ; all which in their proper measure participate in this benefit of redemption; according to that expression of this same Apostle, Ephes i. 10, where he says, That God purposed in : the dispensation of the fuluess of times, avaneparciwoacba to gather together in one, or to renew all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are in earth.

When, therefore, the Apostle says, that it pleased God to reconcile all things to himself, as well things in heaven, as things in earth, by the blood of Christ, we say this reconciliation, taken strictly, refers to men alone, For since to reconcile is to renew a friendship broken off by offence, we alone, from among his enemies, are restored unto the love and favour of God, which we had lost by sinning. If we understand it for effectual reconciliation, it regards the elect alone, who constitute, as it were. a community: as says Ambrose, De voc. gent. i. 3, Among the elect there is a certain special universality to be reckoned. But if we may understand it analogically, it may be extended to the blessed angels themselves, and to all creatures.

With respect to angels; as far as they are confirmed in grace and established in the Divine favour through Christ, so that now it is clearly impossible that any enmity should occur between them and God; therefore the establishment of angels in Divine grace through Christ, is the same thing as the reconciliation of men by the same.

Neither may we doubt that the angels themselves need the grace of Christ the Redeemer, that is to say, the grace of confirmation and exaltation, though not the grace of reconciliation. For, as they are creatures, they cannot of their own nature be beyond danger of falling. Moreover, that heavenly and glorious union with God, which the blessed angels enjoy in eternal life, is a benefit which surpasses the deserts of any creature whatever; therefore, not even the angels themselves are admitted into this ineffable bliss of the Divine fruition, but so far forth as they are enrolled under Christ, the head both of angels and men: Whence the Apostle calls the blessed angels the elect; 1 Tim. v. 21, I charge thee before the elect angels. But the election, whether of men or of angels, out of Christ, cannot be understood. To this, I think, refers that passage of Job (Job xxxviii. 7) where good angels are stiled sons of God, not because they are begotten of God (for Christ is the only Son of God) but because they are adopted as sons of God for Christ’s sake. Hence, therefore, it is evident, that the grace of Christ the Mediator is necessary for the happiness even of angels; not that by it they should be justified and absolved from sin, but that by it they may be confirmed in the Divine love, and exalted to the glorious and abiding participation of God, which transcends the power and dignity of created nature.

Now, in the last place, as to what pertains to the fabric of the world ; it is certain, as all things were created for man, so by the sin of man all things were in a manner overturned, and subjected to vanity and misery. For so the Apostle expressly teaches us, Rom. viii. 19, &c. The whole world waited for the manifestation of the sons of God: For the creature was made subject to vanity under hope, because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption, into the glorious liberty of the children of God. To whom, therefore, will this whole fabric of the world owe its restoration and renovation? Doubtless to Christ the Son of God, our Creator and Restorer, who, dying without sin, won the privilege of being the restorer of all things which were fallen to ruin by sin. It may not, therefore, be improperly said, that Christ hath reconciled all things to God, as well the things that be in earth, as the things that be in heaven: men peculiarly, by taking away their sins, and the wrath of God occasioned by sin: angels analogically ; by taking away the possibility of their falling and of incurring the Divine anger: the fabric of the world metaphorically ; in delivering it from the bondage of corruption, and restoring it to its native purity and beauty, when the fulness of the time shall come ; according to that declaration, 2 Pet. iii. 13, We look for new heavens and a new earth, according to his promise—And thus much concerning the extent of this benefit.

Observe then, Since such is the efficacy of the blood of Christ to establish peace between God and men, we must earnestly labour that we may obtain an interest in the blood of Christ, and partake of that peace which passeth all understanding. The only means of applying to our- . selves this quickening and saving blood of Christ, is true faith; Being justified by faith, we have peace, Rom. v. 1. Let us seek faith from God, that laying hold on the blood of Christ, thereby, that blood may bring peace to our consciences,

Verses 21, 22.

The Apostle descends from the proposition to the particular application of it; and what he had stated generally concerning the reconciliation made by Christ, he applies particularly to the Colossians themselves.

Where we have to observe by the way, That general doctrines are of very little avail to influence the minds of men, unless a special application of them be made to the hearers. For that maxim of the Philosophers, Every action as accomplished by contact, especially applies to the sacred action of preaching. Every doctrine proposed generally, is occupied, as it were, in a remote object, nor can it reach to the soul itself; but when it is specifically applied, it comes in a manner into the very interior of the mind, and touches and penetrates it. But let us examine the words of the text.

In these two verses four things are to be taken notice of;

1. The miserable condition of the Colossians under the state of a corrupt nature; ye were sometime atienaled and enemies.

2. The cause of this misery, viz. their actual wickedness; the mind being intent upon wicked works.

3. Deliverance from this misery under a state of grace; now he hath reconciled you in the body of his flesh.

4. The end or effect of this deliverance ; to present you holy, and unblamable, and unreprovable, &c.

1. And you that were sometime alienated and enemies.] He begins by a description of their miserable condition under sin, in order that they might entertain a greater gratitude for the benefit of deliverance. First he says that they were alienated. From whom? From God, from Christ, from the Church, from all hope of obtaining salvation. For this was the condition of the Gentiles whilst they sat in the darkness of nature, void of the grace of the gospel; as the Apostle fully shews, Ephes. ii. 11, 12, Remember that ye, when ye were Gentiles, were without Christ, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. This is the misery of those that are alienated. Such were the Colossians ; such all the heathen before they were illuminated by the Gospel.

Observe, 1. Clemens Alexandrinus, therefore, has erievously erred, who writes, that the heathen, by virtue of their philosophy, may please God and obtain salvation, Strom. 6.¹⁵⁴ Augustine more truly says, that salvation is to be granted to no one but him to whom the one Mediator between God and man, Christ Jesus, hath been revealed from heaven. De Civit. 18. 47. Why is salvation granted to no one without this? Verily because he remains alienated.

2. Certain also of the Papists are deceived, who talk about merit of congruity, such as they suppose may be found in persons who are not inastate of grace. But whoever is alienated from God and Christ, merits nothing either of condignity or congruity, but the wrath of God and hell : For by nature we are the children of wrath.

Lastly, we must observe, that the Apostle says of the Colossians, that they were dzwoorpisuévovs, alienated, Therefore, both they and all men were united to God according to the law of creation; but they became aliens afterwards by their own fault. Which refutes the foolish notion of Valentinus concerning certain men, whom he calls men of wood and earth, whom he imagined were alienated from God and incapable of salvation, being evil by nature; as Irenzus tells us, lib. i. cap. 1. But, Isa. lix. 2, says, your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you that he will not hear.

And enemies.] He proceeds in his description of their former misery : They were not only alienated from God as to outward condition, but were enemies by internal disagreement. Now they are called enemies as well in the active as in the passive signification of the term, i.e. they hated God as an enemy, they were hated by God as His enemies. This tends very much to augment the misery of the Colossians under that former condition: For if it be the height of felicity to be united to God through love ; then is it the depth of misery to be separated from God by hostile enmity.

That men in the state of a corrupt nature hate God, and therefore in this sense are his enemies, is plain from Rom. i. 90, where among other characteristics of the heathen, this is reckoned by the Apostle, that they are haters of God. The Saviour, John xv. 18, charges the whole world with this crime, If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you ; and a little after he subjoins, He that hateth me hateth my Father also.

But here it is asked, Since God is goodness itself, and since it is of the nature of goodness that it be loved and desired by all, how are men called enemies of God? and in what sense are they said to hate God?

It is answered, first, that as the peculiarity of friends is to like and dislike the same things, so that of enemies is to like and dislike contrary things. By way of interpretation, therefore, (as the Schoolmen say) he is accounted an enemy whose will is opposed to the will of another in all things. But so is the carnal man towards God; Rom. viii. 7, The carnal mind is enmity against God ; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. Secondly, the heathen and the wicked are said to hate God, even directly ; not in that they conceive him to be the Creator and Preserver of the universe (for that is impossible), but to be a lawgiver, a judge, and an avenger.

But man under sin is said to be an enemy to God in another sense, viz. inasmuch as he is odious and hateful to God : For the ungodly and his ungodliness are both alike hateful unto God, Wisdom xiv. 9. Therefore, whilst the Colossians were under a state of sin, they were under the divine wrath and hatred. Rightly said Augustine, on those words of our Saviour, John 111. 36, He that believeth not the Son, the wrath of God abideth on him : not, it will come upon him, but it abideth on him, for long since it fell upon all the children of Adam, the burden of it hes upon them, until it be removed by Christ the Mediator.

Nor is it wonderful that wicked and unholy men should be accounted enemies to God, since God himself is most holy and pure. We consider one thing friendly to another, which bears a resemblance to it in its virtues, says Plato, De leg. 8. Since, therefore, after the fall, so great dissimilarity took place between God and men, they were of necessity alien- ‘ ated and enemies. “Therefore,

1. Since as many as are not yet reconciled to God by Christ, are lying in so miserable and grievous a condition, we should hasten to get out of this state of perdition, and strive with all labour and prayer that we may be translated into a state of salvation.

2. Since God alone hath power to rescue us from this state of condemnation; as many as perceive that they are delivered and received into Divine favour, should give continual thanks and render unceasing obedience to their Deliverer.

Thus much with respect to the misery of the Colossians, and, consequently, of all men under sin.¹⁵⁵

2. The mind being intent upon wicked works, Ti dvavése “ev coi “epyoig T0 16 vro ngo ic ; 1. e. the mind cleaving to, or existing in evil works. For the mind is said to be in that thing which it always meditates upon, to which it is borne, and inclined by its desire ; as the mind of a hungry man is said to be in the dish, so the mind of the wicked is said to be in wicked works. I conceive with the learned Beza, that this is the genuine sense of the words, although they are taken in a different meaning by other interpreters. Here, therefore, the Apostle shews the cause of the enmity between God and men who are not yet called, as the Colossians were aforetime, namely, that corruption and depravity inherent in the mind, and breaking forth and shewing itself in wicked works; according to that declaration of God concerning the fall of man, Gen. vi. 5, Every thought of his heart is only evil continually.

This corruption of the human mind is perceived in the understanding, the will, and also in the inferior faculties and the affections.

1. The understanding is clouded by the darkness of ignorance. Whence that assertion of the Apostle concerning the Gentiles, Ephes. iv. 18, Having the understanding darkened, &c. Hence the worship of devils prevailed for true religion among almost all nations; hence they committed many abominable things without shame, as the Apostle amply states, Rom. i. That this blindness of the understanding is a just cause of Divine hatred, is evident from the Divine nature for God is light, and in him is no darkness at all, 1 John i. 5. And according to the primary law of creation, man was made in the likeness of God.

2. As to the will, it is infected with the poison of wickedness ; which was not unknown to philosophers themselves. For Plato, in his Sophists, expressly asserts, that the mind of every man labours under two diseases; 7gnorance and wickedness. Hence that observation in Job xv. 16, Abonminable and filthy is man ; he drinketh in iniquity as water. “The many adulteries, thefts, murders, and wickedness of every kind openly committed by men, do but too plainly prove this inward perversion of the will. We have here therefore, in the human mind, another cause of this enmity.

9. The last remains, which is ataéia disorder in the affections, and rebellion in the inferior appetites against right reason. Hence that saying of the Poet, I see and approve the better course; but I follow the worse. The human mind is so hurried away by corrupt affections, that although it perceives what is good and ought to be done, what is evil and to be avoided, yet it cannot restrain itself from being borne away in a contrary direction. “This depravity of the human mind Augustine bewailed and wondered at, Confess. viii. cap. 9, Whence this strange thing ? the mind commands the body and it is obeyed ; it commands itself and it is resisted. And the Apostle to the Romans, vii. 19, The good that I would, I do not, and the evil that I would not, that I do. Such and so great depravity exists in the mind, i. e. in the understanding, the will, and the affections of every man: not yet called to Christ Jesus: on which account he is most deservedly reckoned by the Apostle an enemy of God. Hence we conclude,

1. That the fault of original sin does not consist alone or chiefly (as some of the Schoolmen would have it) in the inferior faculties of the mind, but has pervaded all the powers of the soul, and fixed its chief seat in the noblest part of it, that is to say, in the mind itself. For not in this . place only, but in many others also, the Apostle teaches that the mind itself is wholly corrupt by sin. Whence, Rom. xii. 2, he says, Be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind. And concerning the whole man under a state of sin he asserts, 1 Cor. i1. 14, The natural man receiveth not the things vf the Spirit of God. Most truly said Parisiensis, De sacram. baptismi, The human mind not having obtained grace, is nothing better than a dead body. We are not to suppose, therefore, that sin arises solely, or chiefly, from the motions of the sensitive appetite,

2. Amongst the heathen, or whatever others are not yet sanctified in Christ, although there may be found sometimes those who evince an appearance of holiness, of righteousness, chastity, and other virtues; yet the mind of all of them is corrupt and defiled by internal impurity. For, although their hand does it not, yet the mind is bent upon and exercised in wicked works. Or if the mind shrinks from adultery, murder, drunkenness, and the like; yet is it full of pride, infidelity, vanity, and many other spiritual sins, which, for the most part, are more culpable, although carnal vices are more infamous. Well spake Tertullian, There is no truth in those who are ignorant of God, the Head and Lord of truth. Augustine also says shrewdly, in his preface to Ps. xxxi. Although their hands are employed in useful operations and they seem to steer the vessel very well, they are nevertheless hurrying it among the rocks.

3. That all those are still enem?es to God, and in a state of enmity, whose minds are occupied in wicked works. The minds of the godly are often carried away to many sins, lust drawing them aside ; but to cleave to, and, as it were, live in wicked works, this is peculiar to such as are not yet rescued from the power of darkness.

Verse 22.

The Apostle, after he had set before the eyes of the Colossians their former misery in being enemies to God ; and had stated the cause of this misery, and of their enmity, viz. their corrupt mind: immediately presents to them the contemplation of their present happiness, in that they were received into the favour of God; and he subjoins the end or effect of this reconciliation, viz. their sanctification and newness of life, that he may present you holy.

Now hath he reconciled.] That is, after the gospel was preached to you and received by faith; after your mind, which was wholly given to evil works, was purified. And here three things are to be weighed by us.

1. We gather from this place that a twofold reconciliation is to be seen in the Scriptures: The one general, accomplished by the sacrifice upon the cross, concerning which the Apostle speaks in a former verse, It hath pleased God to reconcile all things to himself by the blood of the cross. And John i. 29, Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world. This I call general, because it is considered according to the value of the sacrifice, which is not only general, but infinite ; because also it is considered according to the mode of proposing it, the preaching of the Gospel, which mode is indefinite and general; for this expiatory sacrifice is proposed and offered to all by God, according to that declaration Tit. ii. 11, The grace of God which bringeth salvation hath appeared unto all men. But besides this reconciliation accomplished upon the cross, and generally applicable to all, the Scripture also shews us a particular and applied reconciliation, effected in the heart and conscience of individuals; that is to say, when that: sacrifice of Christ, which hath in itself an universal power of reconciling al!, is actually applied to reconcile this or that man. Of this the Apostle speaks in saying You hath he now reconciled. He had before said, On the cross he hath reconciled all things to God, both which are in heaven and which are in earth, i. e. he hath paid an adequate price for the deliverance and reconciliation of all; but now he hath reconciled you by this particular and applied reconciliation. :

2. We are also taught when, and in what way, men become partakers of this reconciliation, which we call particular; viz. by the exhibition of faith in the Gospel. For in the fourth verse, the Apostle gives thanks to God for the faith of the Colossians. This faith, therefore, is the reason why the Apostle asserts that those who were heretofore alienated from God, are now reconciled. In Rom. iii. it is clearly taught that this application of the sacrifice of atonement to the reconciliation of every believer, is effected by faith: The righteousness of God by faith of Jesus Christ is unto all and upon all them that believe, verse 22. And a little after, Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood. From which words it is clear, that Christ is proposed to the world by God as an universal atonement or propitiation; but that He renders the Father propitious to this or that man, then only when he is specially apprehended by them through faith.¹⁵⁶

Lastly, We see from these words how Christians may shew themselves to be of the number of those who are . truly and effectually reconciled to God, namely, by the change of their mind, will, and works. For from this the Apostle concludes that they were reconciled to God, because that when they were enemies to God, they had their mind occupied by wicked works; but now they manifest themselves to be the servants of God, whilst they strive to please God in all things, and to bring forth the fruit of every good work, as it is said in verse 10, Now hath he reconciled you. The other points which might be noticed concerning this reconciliation, having been explained above, we omit; and pass on to the following words.

In the body of his flesh through death.] ^ That is, in his fleshly and truly human body. The Apostle speaks of the material cause of reconciliation and salvation; and shews that this sacrifice of the body of Christ, was that true and only sacrifice which was shadowed forth by those legal sacrifices which did not avail to expiate sin, as Paul plainly declares, Heb. x. 4, For it ts not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Wherefore when he cometh into the world he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me. But what kind of body? A fleshly, 1. e. a human body, and of the same nature with our bodies. But how was his fleshly body the instrument of our reconciliation? In dying; through death, says the Apostle. “Vide Iren. lib. iv. cap. 74.¹⁵⁷

It is not necessary to repeat what we said about the death of Christ when explaining the 20th verse. From these words of the Apostle we shall note only two things subversive of the foolish notions of certain heretics :

1. That the body of Christ was fleshly, i. e. truly human, not heavenly, or a phantasm, as Marcion and Valentinus formerly fancied, whom Tertullian clearly refutes, If the flesh of Christ were a phantasm, then also all his works which he did by the flesh were so. The form of his existence was suppositious ; the act was suppositious. He was an imaginary worker, and his works were imaginary. And what they commonly adduced in support of this error, viz. that a fleshly body is unworthy of God, the same Father well clears away, by answering, That there is no substance worthy for God to assume ; but whatever he shall assume, he himself renders worthy. Which may be illustrated by the similitude of a king taking a consort to himself from among his subjects.

2. That Christ himself truly suffered and underwent death in this flesh. Which refutes the absurd heresy of Basilides, who taught that Simon the Cyrenian, being transformed into the resemblance of Christ, was crucified by the Jews; but that Christ himself stood by in the likeness of Simon and de- . rided the Jews. Perhaps these extraordinary assertions of heretics do not require a refutation ; for they who thus argue that all things are imaginary, are themselves in truth imaginary Christians, as Tertullian, cap. 27, learnedly argues against the Valentinians.¹⁵⁸ Thus much concerning the deliverance. What remains has respect to the end and effect of this deliverance.¹⁵⁹

To present you holy, and unblamable, and unreprovable in his sight.] He thus shews the end of our redemption and reconciliation, viz. the obtaining righteousness and holiness; which in many other places the sacred Scriptures signify. Luke i. 74, 75, That we being delivered out of the hands of our enemies, might serve God without fear, in holiness and righteousness, all the days of our life. And Tit. ii. 14, Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people zealous of good works.

But here the Apostle seems to comprehend a twofold holiness of those that are reconciled; one which consists in the remission of sins, and the imputation of Christ’s righteousness ; the other which consists in our renovation, and in the fruits of holiness. For in both ways Christ presents all his people holy before God. They are now strictly saints by imputation, because they are regarded as one mystical person with Christ their head; but as to inherent holiness, that is not effected instantly, but increases daily, and acquires not the summit of its perfection before we are translated from this life to the life of glory. Yet we maintain that this incipient sanctification is real, although not complete. And therefore the Apostle adds these words, before God. For he is said to be just and holy before God, who is so in reality, not in appearance only ; in rectitude of intention, not in ficlitious imitation, as Lyra not inaptly remarks on these words. sophers, who entertained the most extravagant and insane opinions respecting a succession of derivative fountains of being, or existences proceeding from the Deity, through which the stream of life flows onward to the utmost verge of the universe. These they call /Eons, one of whom they made the Creator of this world. Dasilides attempted to blend Christianity with the monstrous absurdities of this system. He wrote twenty-four books upon the Gospel, and in these broached such impieties and blasphemies of the shocking character of which our Expositor has adduced a specimen.— Valentinus, (to whose absurdities reference was made at page 250) was likewise an Egyptian Gnostic of the same period, who, if possible, exceeded Basilides in his insane vagaries and blasphemies—notions to which one can hardly imagine nothing but the brain of a maniac could have given birth.

But concerning the distinction of those words which are here brought together, we have forgotten to observe one thing. The expression, then, to present us holy, some refer to God,.in this sense, to present us such as God may acknowledge for holy and dedicated to him. That next, wnblamable, they refer to the private conscience; that is to say, that he may present us such as our own conscience does not condemn ; according to that word, Rom. viii. J, There is no condemnation. Finally, that expression dveyxantous, unreprovable, they refer to others: to wit, that we be such as our neighbours cannot deservedly blame.—But we need not lay much stress on the distinction of the words, since it is the custom of the Holy Scriptures to bring together synonimous words merely for the sake of amplification : and perhaps the Apostle intended nothing else by collecting and uniting these three words, than to make known that Christ the Mediator imparts his perfect righteousness to all his people. But now let us gather some observations :

1. By his saying, that He may present us holy, not that we should present ourselves holy, it is evident that those who are reconciled and renewed have obtained their holiness from Christ, whether we speak of it as actual, or inherent, orby imputation. For we make no attempts at good, if they be not excited ; and they are vain, if they be not assisted. Whence that declaration of Paul, By the grace of God I am what Lam: I laboured more abundantly than they all; yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. Infused righteousness remains not, neither is operative without Christ: and imputed righteousness covers us only so far as we are accounted in Christ, as members under the head.

2. By his saying that Christ hath reconciled us that he might present us holy, we readily understand that they are not yet reconciled to God, who abide in their former impurity ; for whomsoever Christ hath delivered from divine wrath, them also hath he freed from the service of sin. We must therefore beware, lest we flatter ourselves with a false hope of reconciliation, without this evidence of sane-

5 2 tification and renewal. This is fully proved from Rom. vi. 18, Being made free from sin, ye were the servants of righteousness.

3. Whereas he adds, To present you holy before God, he shews that no semblance of piety and religion can profit men, if by external duties they cover over the secrets of. impiety, as Tertullian says. For he who is commended by men, when blamed by God, shall not be acquitted by men when condemned by God.

And thus far we have explained the benefit of redemption described by the Apostle, as well in general with respect to all, as in particular in regard to the Colossians. The last part of this chapter yet remains, in which he exhorts them to perseverance in this most true doctrine, which recognizes all the means of human salvation as placed in Christ only.

Verse 23.

Our Apostle has before unfolded and applied to the Colossians, the sum of Evangelical doctrine concerning the person of Christ, and the benefit of redemption and reconciliation by Him. From hence to the end of the chapter he exhorts them to perseverance in this most true doctrine, which Epaphras had preeched to them, which he, Paul, also had now confirmed by his approbation and concurrence: Because not that faith which is only received, but that which is retained quickens, as Cyprian speaks, Epist. lib. i. epist. 5.

In this verse he stirs them up by three arguinents to a stedfast faith in this Evangelical doctrine. The first is derived from the utility and necessity of constancy and perseverance in the right faith: for without this no fruit of the redemption by Christ is obtained ; If ye continue in the faith, &c. The second is derived from the multitude of believers, or from the common consent of all Christians ; for this same gospel was preached and received through the whole world ; therefore it is folly to leave this and embrace the new doctrine of seducers. The third is derived from Paul’s own ministry : Paul, who was an Apostle called of God, and taught the mystery of the faith by the Holy Spirit, had preached this doctrine everywhere; therefore the Colossians ought to abide in this doctrine, and not hearken to those new teachers, who drew them from Christ, and would have them seek salvation elsewhere. ;

Tf ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the Gospel which ye have heard.] This is the first incentive to perseverance in the true faith, derived, as before said, from the utility and necessity of it : From the utility in this manner, If ye continue in the faith, &e. then Christ will present you holy, unblamable, and unreprovable before God : therefore it is highly useful to continue. From the necessity in this manner, If ye do not conti- nue in the faith, then ye cannot be partakers of the power of those benefits which are offered in Christ: therefore it is equally necessary to continue. For this verse connects with the former, and unites with it the condition which God imposes upon us, if we would enjoy the redemption and reconciliation procured by Christ. There are many things to be noted in this argument of the Apostle.

1. That by faith we are constituted holy, unblamable, and unreprovable before God. This is deduced from the very connection of this verse with the foregoing. The Apostle had affirmed in that, that Christ had reconciled the Colossians to God, in order to present them holy: here he adds the condition of faith, by which they apply and acquire this holiness to themselves. Therefore, not an incipient renovation, not the works which we do, constitute us righteous and unreprovable before God ; but faith, apprehending Christ and seeking daily the forgiveness of sins. So it is regarded Rom. iii. 22, The righteousness of God, by faith of Jesus Christ, is unto all and upon all them that believe. And Gal. ii. 16, We know that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ. Whence said Augustine, De civit. lib. 19. cap. 26, The perfection of our righteousness is placed rather in the remission of our sins than in the perfection of our virtues. And, Contra duas Epist. Pelag. lib. 3. cap. 5, Our faith determines that of unjust we are become just, not by the law of works, but by the very law of faith.

2. The kind of faith of those who are truly reconciled to God which constitutes them holy and unreprovable in his sight, is not an uncertain, temporary, and illusory faith ; but a rooted, solid, and stable one. For the Apostle requires us to be cs9suexiuévor xau “edpator, grounded and settled. The former of these words is taken from buildings, whose foundations are laid in solid, not in sandy, or miry ground : the other from seats, upon which those who have sat down remain immoveable. This, therefore, the Apostle intends, That the true and living faith which reconciles to God, and constitutes a man just, is not volatile, but, as it were, founded upon a rock, and fixed in a firm place by deep roots. Admirably said Cyprian, Lib. De simpl. prelat., Let no one account that the good can depart from the Church. The wind does not disperse the wheat ; nor the tempest overturn the tree fixed by strong roots. Empty chaff is driven about by the storm; feeble trees are beaten down by the gust of a whirlwind. They went out from us, but they were not of us: forif they had been of us, they would have remained with us. 1 John 1i. 19.

3. Upon what foundation this faith rests; even upon the free promises of God which are offered in the Gospel. This the Apostle shews in saying, and be ye not moved from the hope of the Gospel: for the hope of the Gospel denotes the expectation of those rewards which the Gospel promises to believers. For there is this difference between the Law and the Gospel : the Law puts the hope of eternal life under the condition of works and of perfect obedience; le that doeth these things shall live in them, Levit. xviii. 5: but the Gospel inspires the hope of salvation in us, through the mercy of God alone, on the condition of faith; He that believeth hath eternal life.

Therefore the Papists, who find the hope of their salvation in the law, and trust to their own merits for justification, overturn, and, as much as in them lies, extinguish the grace of the Gospel. We do not exclude the pursuit of good works, but the merit thereof; neither do we deny that those who are reconciled should do good works; but we maintain that these works are not such, as can present us holy and unreprovable before God: This is the peculiar province of faith, as it apprehends Christ the Mediator and Redeemer. Although, therefore, we have not a legal hope which arises from the special merits and perfect observance of the law; yet we are not moved away from Evangelical hope, which is founded on the gratuitous promises of God, and his fatherly compassion by Christ.

Lastly, from all these considerations we conclude, that there are two sorts of men altogether excluded from the benefits of Christ: one, of those who are wholly devoid of faith, of whom it is said, He that believeth not shall be damned ; the other, of those who have acquired a certain appearance or shadow of faith, yet prove, by falling away, ! that it was either a loose opinion, or a certain sudden light; not a true and justifying faith, rooted in the recess of the heart, united with sanctification and regeneration. Tertullian, De preescript. advers. heret. cap. 3, says concerning these, let the straws of light faith fly away as they will at any blast of temptation ; the heap of corn will be laid up the purer in the garner of God. And a little before, They are neither to be regarded as prudent or faithful whom heresies have been able to draw aside. — He is no Christian unless he persevere even unto the end. Since, therefore, the utility and the necessity of true and abiding faith is so great, the Apostle, by this consideration, exhorts the Colossians, and all Christians, to continue in the faith and the doctrine of the Gospel.—Thus much as to the first reason.

Which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature under heaven.] This is the second reason why it behoved the Colossians to continue in that doctrine of the Gospel which they had learned of Epaphras ; namely, because it was the same with that which the Apostles had i disseminated through the whole world. For although the truth of the Gospel does not rest upon human authority or approbation, or the number of believers, yet the consent of all the churches in receiving the same doctrine, contributes much to the confirmation of our faith.

But what the Apostle here says, that the Gospel was preached ¢o every creature, is taken in various ways by interpreters ; yet in this they agree, that under the designation creature, should be understood only the rational creature, viz, mankind ; because they alone can comprehend and need the doctrine of the Gospel. And so the Saviour himself speaks, Mark xvi. 15, Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. Therefore this epithet is appropriated in common to the human race by the figure antonomasia, because man is the chief of all the creatures, Gregory, in Moral. vi. cap. 7, seems to me to assign a reason for this, more ingenious than solid: By EVERY CREA- TURE (says he) man alone is understood, because existence ds common to him with stones, life with trees, sensation with animals, discernment with angels: he is, therefore, rightly expressed by a title of universality, under which, in a certain degree, the universe itself is comprehended.

But it being admitted, that by every creature we must understand all men, yet some doubt may arise how the Gospel can be said to have been preached to all men, since it is very probable, that in the time of the Apostles, many existed who were not made partakers of the Gospel.

Some, therefore, reply, that there is a certain hyperbolical synecdoche in these words, nor could the Apostle mean any thing else than that the doctrine of the Gospel was disseminated far and wide. Others think that the preterite is put for the future, which was customary in prophetical predictions, to denote the certainty of future things. Because, therefore, the Gospel was at that time preached among many nations, and to be preached in due time to all, it is spoken of as preached then to every creature.

But they seem to me to explain this passage best, who say, that every creature, or the whole world, is opposed to the single Jewish nation : so that the sense will be, that the Gospel was proposed not to the Jews alone, as the Mosaic law was; but also to other nations without distinction. Therefore there is nothing else signified by this kind of expression, than (what Paul sets forth in Galat. 111. 28) that in the Gospel there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither bond nor free, neither male nor female ; but that Christ is equally offered to all in the preaching of the Gospel. This Gospel then, in the faith of which he wished the Colossians to : continue, is the same as was preached to all other people. But we spake of this universal extension of the Gospel when we explained the sixth verse; therefore it is not necessary to add more: We only deduce from hence a few observations.

1. We hence infer against the Papists, That it is sufficient for salvation if we yield credence to that Gospel which was openly preached to all, although we may be ignorant of, and reject those doctrines, which they foist upon ! the faithful under the title of traditions. For Paul clearly teaches, that the Colossians would be holy and unblamable, if they continued in the faith and the hope of the Gospel which was preached to every creature. In vain, then, do the Papists cry out, that there are certain traditions not written, but privately committed to certain perfect men, to which, however, they would have the faith of all Christians bound under the pain of anathema. Of this character are those opinions concerning purgatory—indulgences—the adoration of images—the Supremacy of the Pope; to which if any one does not give credit, he is put as much beyond a state of salvation by them, as if he denied altogether the fundamental articles of the faith. But we affirm with Tertullian, Prescript. Heret. cap. 22, It is not to be believed that the Apostles either did not know the fulness of the Gospel, or gave not a complete rule to all. Nay, Paul himself deprecates this perfidy which the Papists palm upon all the Apostles: Acts xx. 26, Ye are my witnesses that I am pure from the blood of all men. For [ have not shunned to declare unto you the whole counsel of God.

2. Hence we also infer, That the word of God is not to be withheld from the laity, but that all men are to be invited to the reading, hearing, and meditating on it. For if the Apostles have promulged to all people, all things necessary to salvation; if they committed the same to writing, that from the knowledge thereof the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished to every good work, 2 Tim. iii. 17, why is that Gospel now pertinaciously denied to a Christian people, which was preached to every creature from the beginning? Whatever they insist upon in opposition to the reading of the Gospel, the same might have been alleged against the preaching of it: For many understood not the Apostolical declarations; many, misunderstanding them, perverted them to establish errors. But notwithstanding these things, the Apostles invited all to hear; therefore, we also ought to call upon all to read. But, on the other hand, the Papists fear lest their people should be injured by reading the Scriptures, though they have no apprehension lest they should be injured by reading foolish and lying fables. The orthodox Fathers have both judged and spoken otherwise about the Scriptures. Chrysostom frequently exhorts the people to read the Scriptures with all diligence. Horn. 9. in Epist. ad. Coloss. He hath the like in Horn. 3, De Lazaro, and elsewhere. Augustine, De utilitate credendi, ad Honor. cap. 6, says, The doctrine of Scripture is so adapted, that every one cannot but draw from thence what is sufficient for him, tf he only comes to draw devotedly and piously. It will not be tedious to add to these that most admirable testimony of Damascenus, De fide orthod. lib. iv. cap. 18: Kdaaorov xai duxagentctatoy, &c. The best and most useful thing for the soul, is to search diligently the Scriptures: For asatree planted besides the running waters, so the soul watered with the divine Scriptures is enriched, and bears perfect fruit, viz. sound faith ; and is always adorned with verdant leaves, i. e. deeds pleasing to God. But to what purpose are these things? That ye may understand that that wholesome doctrine which God would have to be preached through the whole world, is unjustly withheld from Christian people.

Lastly. When the Apostle directs us to continue in the Gospel which was preached by the Apostles in all the world, he delivers to us the rule of the true and catholic faith, viz. the apostolical preaching, which we now have committed to us in writing. If we can shew the doctrine of our Church to correspond with this, we are Catholics, although we dissent not only from the church of Rome, but from many other churches. For we ought to continue firm and grounded in that faith which was from the first preached to every creature, not in novel dogmas which af- . terwards crept into the Church. Rightly and wisely said Gerson, De vit. Spirit. par. 3, The doctrines of the Apostles are of another authority than those of their successors; even as the authority of the primitive Church was greater than that of the present. — [t is not, therefore, in the power of the Pope, or of councils, to change the doctrines delivered to us by the Apostles: nor have they equal authority with respect to this point, viz. to make any thing to be clearly an article of faith. . Thus testifies Gerson. But Paul himself speaks much more pointedly, If we, or an angel from heaven, should preach any other Gospel unto you, than that we have preached, let him be accursed, Gal. 1. 8. Since, therefore, our church acknowledges and receives the apostolic doctrine heretofore preached in all the world, let us not regard the railings of Romanists, who call us heretics and schismastics because we continue not stedfast in certain papistical errors.

Thus much concerning the second reason why we should continue in the doctrine of the Gospel.

Whereof I, Paul, am made a minister.] This is the last argument for continuance in the doctrine received. For in these words it is shewn, that the Gospel preached to the Colossians by Epaphras, was the same with that which was every where disseminated by Paul himself. Moreover, Paul, although he was personally unknown to the Colossians, was yet of great celebrity among all the churches : for his wonderful conversion and his call to the Apostleship were matters of great notoriety among them. If, therefore, every man in his own calling is worthy of credit, then ought Paul, who was set apart for the preaching of the gospel, to be credited concerning the truth of the Gospel rather than the false Apostles: But this Paul approved the doctrine of Epaphras ; therefore ought the Colossians to continue in it. Three things are here to be observed.

1. Christians must not lend their ears to those who undertake the office of preaching when they have not a legitimate call to it. For the Apostle seems in this place to oppose his lawful ministry to that of those seducers who had crept into the church of the Colossians, relying upon their own temerity not upon the Divine appointment. No wonder, therefore, if those who possessed not lawful authority to teach at all, should teach falsehood. Such were they who wished to lead away the Colossians from the Gospel; but, nevertheless, they must continue in it.

2. That no one can exercise the public office of the Ministry, unless he can say with Paul, that he is made a minister of the Gospel. Therefore a call is to be looked for, from the authority either of God giving a special revelation, or of a superior giving a mission, or of inevitable necessity ; as Gerson properly asserts, par. 3. Upon those who act otherwise, that sentence of Jeremiah, xxiii. 21, is deservedly launched, J have not sent these prophets, yet they ran; I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied.

Lastly, That legitimate Pastors themselves are to be only ministers of the Gospel, not lords; according to that saying of Paul, 2 Cor. 1. 24, We have not dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy. The true Apostles, content with ministering only, left all authority in matters of faith to God. But our well known self-erected apostle in sheep’s clothing arrogates to himself the authority of creating new doctrines of faith, and of imposing them upon Christian people under anathema : nay more, that whatever he happens to dream when placed in his chair of authority, must be regarded as oracular through Christendom. But no one is bound to believe a minister, only so far as he proves to us that he speaks according to the mind of the Lord. So Aquinas, quest. disp. de fide, art. 10, We do not believe the successors of the Apostles only so far as they announce to us what the Apostles left to them in the Scriptures. This is the case with all who are made ministers of the Gospel; we are not bound to repose faith in them only so far as the testimony of God is considered to be in them. We receive the voice of God himself with undoubting faith ; but we prove the doctrine of ministers by judging whether it agrees with divine truth, before we yield credence to it: and for this end, to every believer the faculty of judging is given by the Holy Spirit, as to every man is given by nature and reason the faculty of judging in hu-‘ man affairs.

Thus much concerning these three arguments with which the Colossians are excited to constancy.

Verses 24, 25.

In the preceding verse the Apostle had said, that he was made a minister of the Gospel by God: here he expatiates on those afflictions which he underwent on account of the Gospel and of his ministry therein : and in so doing he seems to anticipate an implied objection. For the Colossians might be inclined to say, Why do you exhort us to perseverance in the doctrine of the Gospel? They who profess it are daily oppressed by innumerable calamities. You, yourself, are now living in bonds in consequence of your professing and preaching the Gospel. The Apostle, therefore, anticipates this objection, and argues, that because he is now enduring persecution on account of the Gospel, they, for that very reason, ought to persevere in it; for , unless its doctrines were both true and saving, he never would undergo such numberless inconveniences for the promulgation of it.

Here, therefore, two points are to be considered :—How the Apostle conducts himself under these afflictions; namely, with a placid, and even a joyful mind, I rejoice in my sufferings for you. What reasons he had for this joy and for such endurance: and he assigns three,

The Apostle rejoices in these his afflictions, first, because of conformity with Christ; J fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ.

2. Because of the advantage redounding therefrom to the Church ; for his body the Church.

3. Because of the nature of the office assigned to him by God, to which these afflictions were subservient; whereof I am made a minister, Ke.

Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you.] Here he shews how he conducts himself in his afflictions; not only with fortitude, but with joy and cheerfulness. He therefore wishes, by this his example, both to encourage the Colossians to stedfastness in the Gospel, and even to strengthen them to the endurance of any suffering for the Gospel’s sake. This personal fortitude, indeed, and promptitude to encounter afflictions of every kind for the benefit of the Church, he professes on all occasions: vid. Acts xxi. 13; 2 Tim. ii. 10; and 2 Cor. xii. 15. Most willingly will I spend and be spent for your sakes, i.e. their souls’ sakes. Now from this disposition in St. Paul, we infer,

1. That the ministers of the Gospel ought to be ever ready to bear their cross: The servant is not greater than his Lord ; if. they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you, John xv. 20. The ministers are leaders, as it were, in this Christian warfare; and the devil is sure to harass the leaders more than the private soldiers. Cyprian speaks correctly when he says, De singul. Cleric. The enemy aims more at the officers in an engagement than the men; and the higher the pinnacles of. buildings, the more violently are they beaten by, the winds and storms. If, therefore, patience be requisite for all Christians, however humble their station, ministers of the word, who, of course, are exposed to injuries and reproaches of all kinds, and from every quarter, have the more need of it. Christ himself has apprised them of this in these words: Ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake. But in your patience possess ye your souls, Luke xxi. 17, 19.

2. It is not enough merely to bear the cross, it must be done without reluctance of spirit, or inward repining; nay it ought to be made our joy and glory when we suffer indignities for the sake of the Gospel, and of our sacred: ministry. It is therefore said of the Apostles, They departed from the presence of the council rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for the name of Jesus, Acts v. 41. That is a bad soldier, says Prosper, who follows his General sorrowing. If you have done any good in a reluctant manner, you are rather the sufferer of the action than the agent of it. We should, therefore, ever place before us the example of Paul, who rejoices in the things which he suf- . fered.

Thus we see how the Apostle behaved in his afflictions : Let us now investigate the causes of such exemplary patience and joy. The first is derived from the conformity which we have to Christ through sufferings and afflictions, conveyed in these words which immediately follow.

And fill up that which ts behind of the afflictions of Christ in my body.] In this place the conjunction serves instead of a causal particle. For the Apostle is giving his reason why hé ought to rejoice in.his sufferings, viz. because by this means he fills up in his body that which remained of the afflictions of Christ. And here two questions arise for explanation: 1. Why the Apostle assigns his sufferings to Christ himself. 2. Why he says that he fills up, vorspnuara, that which is behind, or the remains, or, as it is in the Vulgate, those things which are wanting in the sufferings of Christ. For these words seem at first sight to imply that the passion of Christ was imperfect. ^

Now as to the first question; the sufferings of Paul, and of all other true believers, are called the sufferings of Christ himself on two accounts:

1. Because of the mystical union that subsists between the Head and the members, in respect of which not only the Head, but the whole body of the Church, is comprised under the name of Christ. For this statement we have the clearest authority, 1 Cor. xii. 12, For as the body ts one and hath many members ; so also is Christ. In which expression, the term Christ denotes both the Head itself, and the Church united to this Head. Now it is customary for every one to attribute to himself those injuries which are inflicted upon any part of his body. Thus wounds of the hand or foot are properly said to be the wounds of the man himself; and it is usual for him to exclaim that he is wounded in the hand or in the foot. So also, in the same manner, the Apostle, because he is himself a member of the body of Christ, calls his afflictions the afflictions of Christ. This, then, is the first reason: Because Christ and all his members constitute one mystic person.

2. The second reason is; because of the sympathy Christ feels in the afflictions of his members, and which is the result of the union before spoken of. For as we are accustomed to consider the privations and sufferings of those with whom we are most intimately connected as our own, because we are as much afflicted with their distresses as we should be by our own; so Christ accounts the sufferings of his brethren as his own, because he is not less affected by them than when he himself suffered. Virgil introduces Mezentius crying out that he was wounded, when his son was slain by the sword of Eneas.

is Aet, nunc misero mhi demum

Exilium infeliz, nunc alte vulnus adactum.*

ZEneid. x.

* soeessÀh! now at length

On wretched me my exile lies,

Now the deep wound is driven home. So Christ himself exclaims from heaven, Acts ix. 4, Saul! Saul! why persecutest thou me? The afflictions of the godly, therefore, are called the afflictions of Christ, by reason of his union and joint sufferings with them.

Now then let us enquire, Why the Apostle not only ascribes his sufferings to Christ, but also adds, that he himself filled up that which was behind of the afflictions of Christ in his body.

And first of all, we must beware of inferring from hence that the passion of Christ was imperfect, or that any thing was wanting in it for the full liberation of the human race, and satisfaction for their sins. For the whole volume of Scripture declares the contrary. He was wounded for our transgressions ; and by his bruising we are healed, Isa. liii. 5. By one offering of himself he hath for ever perfected them that are sanctified, Heb. x. 14. As far, therefore, as satisfaction for sins is concerned, there is no deficiency in the passion of Christ.

Therefore, that we may clearly understand this subject, we must know that God not only decreed by his eternal counsel what sufferings Christ on his part should in his i body undergo for the redemption of the Church ; but also what each member of the Church should in his flesh be . subject to for the name of Christ: But both these sufferings, as well of the Head as of the members (as we have already shewn), are called the sufferings of Christ, and make up, as it were, one body of sufferings ; with this distinction, however, that he suffered for the redemption of the Church, which sufferings of his may be called mporepnuala the preceding sufferings: we suffer on other accounts, and our sufferings should be called vcrepyyata, the succeeding sufferings ; for we do but slightly taste of that cup of afflictions, which Christ first drank deeply of and commended to us. But all his sutferings he submitted to for the atonement of sins; we are subjected to them for other reasons.

Any Christian, therefore, may be said to fill up that which remains of the sufferings of Christ, when he takes up the — cross of Christ and bears patiently those afflictions which God has allotted to be borne by him after the pattern of Christ, though for another purpose. Upon this passage of Lyra makes no bad comment: The sufferings of Christ are taken in a twofold sense ; in one, for those which he actually sustained in his own body, in which nothing remains to be completed ; in the other, for those which he should sustain in his mystical body, even to the end of the world ; and thus there remains the residue of many sufferings still to be completed.

What has been thus observed upon the sufferings of Paul, and, by parity of reasoning, of all the faithful, viz. that they are accounted the sufferings of Christ himself, tends

1. To strike terror into the ungodly. Whilst they are afflicting the Church, they think that they are only vexing a few pitiful and contemptible men. But the real fact is far otherwise ; for they are wounding Christ himself (who is the Head of all believers) in his members. Vengeance, therefore, the most inevitable and bitter, awaits them ; seeing that they are provoking the Loid of glory himself, to whom all power is given in heaven and in earth, Matth. xxviii, 18.

2. Tothe honour and dignity of the godly. For surely an honour and dignity it is to be received into the fellowship of the sufferings of Christ. Therefore we read in Acts v. 41, They rejoiced that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for the name of Jesus: And in Phil. i. 29, To you it is given not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for his sake. Nazianzen says, reason prescribes that we rather honour than despise the afflicted. And why should we not regard them as highly honoured who are preferred above others to a participation of Christ’s sufferings, as it were to a participation of the royal cup; and who drink of that cup, indeed, of which Christ drank first ?

3. To the great consolation of the pious. Because it confirms their hope of obtaining future blessedness. his is a faithful saying, If we be dead with Christ we shall also live with him; if we suffer with him we shall also reign together with him, 2 Tim. n. 11, 12. Whence Gregory remarks; The more sorely I am borne down by present evils, the more assuredly do I anticipate future joys. Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven, Matth. v. 10.

And thus much of Paul’s first reason for rejoicing in his sufferings, viz. because of his being made like to Christ.

For his body’s sake which is the Church.] This is the second reason which the Apostle gives for rejoicing in his sufferings, viz. because great benefit would arise to the Church from them. For so he speaks to the Philippians, 1.12, I would ye should understand, brethren, that the things which happened unto me have fallen out rather unto the furtherance of the Gospel. And again, 2 Tim. i. 10, Therefore I endure all things for the elects’ sake, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus. But in what sense is Paul said to suffer for the Church, or for the Elect ?

He is said to suffer for them, not to effect their redemption, or to expiate their sins; but for their edification and confirmation in the doctrine of the Gospel. For he suffered imprisonment and bonds, not for any actual sins of his own, but for preaching the Gospel: hence he says that he suffered trouble for the word even unto bonds: 2 Tim. ii. 9. Nor did Paul ever suppose for a moment that his sufferings could purchase remission of other men’s punishment; but . only that his example might confirm others in a similar constancy. For which reason in a passage above cited he said, that he endured all things for the elects’ sake ; not that they should look for satisfaction to be made for their sins by the merit of his sufferings; but that they might obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus. In this very passage also, immediately after mentioning his sufferings for the Church, he adds, of which I am made a minister ; not, of which [am made a Mediator, or a Redeemer: giving us thereby to understand that-he did not speak of his sufferings as affording satisfaction, but as tending to edification. For his sufferings had this end in view, the building up of the Church by preaching the word and enduring persecution.

But since the Papists pervert this passage, to ground their doctrine of indulgences, it will not be at all irrelevant to my purpose briefly to glance at the controversy on this point.

Cajetan, in his tract, De indulgent. quest. 3, in order to prove that the sufferings of the saints can make satisfaction for the temporal punishment due to the sins of their fellow men, provided they be applied to them by a Papal Indulgence, alleges this passage, and has these words: That it was the intention of the saints to suffer for us, the Apostle testifies when he says, I fill up those things which are wanting of the sufferings of Christ for his body which is the Church. Whence it appears clearly, that the divine Providence had ordained some sufferings of the saints should have respect to the completion of the sufferings of Christ, for his body ; and that the saints did complete this ordinance by the superabundance of their sufferings. Catharinus takes occasion from this passage to descant upon indulgences copiously. The Rhemish annotators also collect from these words that the sufferings of the saints do make satisfaction for others, and may be communicated to those who need them on the score of that communion which subsists between all the members of the same mystical body; and in this communication consists, as they say, the dispensation of indulgences. Let us, therefore, in a few words, propound what they on the one side, and we on the other, have stated on this point; and then we shall confirm our doctrine, and refute theirs.¹⁶⁰ Now the Papists, for enabling them to legalize this scandalous trafficking in indulgences, prepare the way by four preliminary deceptions.

First, they pretend that though God does remit all the guilt to the truly penitent, yet that he does it only by commuting the eternal punishment into a temporal one; so that those sins must either be expiated and redeemed by certain satisfactory works, or they must be atoned for in purgatory.

In the second place, they lay it down as a maxim, that some few, as, for instance, the blessed Virgin, John the Baptist, and many of the martyrs, had suffered much heavier punishments than were due to their own individual sins, and had wrought more good works than were necessary for ensuring their own salvation.

Thirdly, they assert, that these superabundant sufferings of theirs, being duly mixed up with those of Christ, are laid up in the common store-house of the Church.

Lastly, they assert, that this treasure is placed by the Almighty in the hands of the Roman Pontiff, to be disposed of at his pleasure; so that he has the power of bestowing these superabundant sufferings of the saints upon any penitent whatever, who shall, by their potency, be released from all temporal punishment due to him, either from ecclesiastical injunctions, or even from the dispensation of divine justice. And upon these deceptions, as upon a ] foundation, is built the whole system of Indulgences so profusely vended by Papal bulls.¹⁶¹

We, on the other hand, contend ;

1. First, that to all believers and true penitents, as well the expiatory punishment, as the entire guilt, is remitted, for the sake of the passion and satisfaction of Christ.

2. We deny that any of the saints ever possessed superabundant merits in themselves, or suffered severer punishments than their sins deserved.

3. If we allow that those saints were harassed and afflicted more than their sins deserve, yet we utterly deny that any accumulation of merits can arise from thence, to be drawn upon for the remission of other men’s punishments, which they have incurred from divine justice.

Lastly, if there be a store of merits and sufferings attached to the Church (which, as respects the merits and sufferings of Christ, we willingly acknowledge,) yet we deny that it is committed to the Pope’s custody, or that he has any power by his bulls of assigning the sufferings of Christ and his saints to men. And now for the proofs of these positions.

1. Christ the Mediator hath taken upon himself both the guilt and the punishment due to us, and, by his passion, hath delivered us from both; therefore there can be no need either of our own satisfaction, or of those of the saints, to be applied to us by papal bulls. The antecedent is easily substantiated by the clearest Scripture authorities. My blood is shed for many for the remission of sins, Matth. xxvi. 28. But the remission of sin implies nothing more, as Durandus properly observes, lib. 4, than that it is not imputed to us for punishment. There is no condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus, Rom. viii. 1. But condemnation has reference properly to the punishment imposed for guilt in conformity with the sentence of the judge. Whenever, therefore, condign punishment is inflicted, the sentence of condemnation has most assuredly preceded. Their iniquities will I remember no more, Jer. xxxi. 34. But he who executes punishment after the guilt has been forgiven, plainly shews that he keeps the guilt itself in remembrance. Moreover, when the guilt and the punishment are proportioned, as the measure to the thing measured, then, whatever quantity of expiatory punishment is required, the same quantity of sin committed is imputed. Therefore the first proposition, which supposes that Christ hath obtained for us a half remission, is false. Christ, says Augustine, by imputing to us the punishment which he suffered, without any guilt of his own, hath cancelled both the guilt and the punishment.

2. None of the saints either had superabundant merits, or bore sufferings greater than their sins deserved. Therefore it is absurd to look to them for a borrowed satisfaction for those punishments which we deserve from the justice of God. They had no superabundant merits, because no man ever yet hath perfectly satisfied the divine law Enter not into judgment with thy servant, O Lord, said the. Psalmist, exliii. 2, for in thy sight shall no man living be justified, Again, Ps. exxx. 3, If thou, Lord, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand. And Bernard, in his comment on Ps. xci. 14, observes, with equal nobleness of sentiment and piety of heart, The sum total of man’s merit is this, to fix all his hopes on him by whom salvation is com- 2 plete, Tom. 1. To this you may add, that the merits of even a holy man are in no way equal to the purchase of eternal happiness; and, therefore, most foolishly do the Papists look for a superabundance, in those in whom it is impossible to find an equivalent. Nor, indeed, did any of the godly at any time suffer punishment more extensive than their sins. For God always inflicts punishment short of what the Schoolmen call coudiguily ; because infinite punishment is due, as the Papists themselves admit, for a single mortal sin, even of. the least degree. The second opinion, therefore, of the Papists, which ascribes penal . sufferings to the saints, severer than the demerits of their own sins, falls to the ground.

3. The merits and sufferings of the saints cannot be communicated to others in such a manner, either by imputation or application of them, as to free them from the punishment of their offences: In vain, therefore, do the Papists attempt to establish a treasure upon these grounds. And this we prove,

1. Because, by the general consent of Theologians, no man’s merits, save those of Christ alone, extend beyond the man himself. To this the Papists readily answer, that the works of the saints, as to their merits, do not extend beyond the individual himself, nor are transferable to other men; but that in respect of their satisfactory virtue, they may be both imputed and imparted to others. But we shall easily get rid of this distinction, For whatever has been already most highly rewarded in the saints themselves, cannot still remain to be rewarded, or in any way to be imputed to others for their remission ; but both the sufferings and all the good works of the saints, as well meritorious as satisfactory, are most abundantly rewarded by that single gift of bliss eternal. For these works are, (as they maintain) meritorious as far as they originate in love; and satisfactory as far as they have penalty attached to them; But whether we consider love, or penalty, or any thing else as the condition of works, that single prize suffices for a most ample remuneration; nay, further, the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed. Rom. viii. 18.

2. Secondly, No man can make satisfaction for another in respect of an injury done to a third person, unless by permission of the person to whom the injury is done. Wherefore Aquinas, in commenting upon those words in Rom. iil. Ye are justified through the Redemption which is in Christ Jesus, whom God has set forth as a propitiation, has thus expressed himself; According to this, the satisfaction made by Christ was effectual both for justification and redemption ; because God had ordained him to this according to his purpose. But God never ordained, according to his purpose, that any of the saints should make satisfaction for us; therefore no satisfaction of theirs delivers us from punishment. No man can deliver his brother, Psal. xlix. 8. Was Paul crueified for you? 1 Cor. 1. 13. We have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous ; and he ws the propitiation for our sins, 1 John ii. 1, 2, viz. he himself alone and no other than he. Leo, writing on the sufferings of the martyrs, and all the saints, well observes, They have received crowns, they have not bestowed them ; and their fortitude has afforded examples of. patience, not rewards of righteousness*

* Pope Leo I. surnamed the Great ; elected Bishop of Rome in 440, and deservedly reckoned among the Fathers of the Church. He is allowed on all hands to have been a man of great energy of character, and of decided piety ; and very strenuous for the authority of his See. He did not, however, claim for it that supremacy over others which was subsequently assumed; yet it was not a little enhanced in its pretensions by the great respect paid to his personal merits. Soon after his elevation his episcopal zeal was called into action against the Manichzeans, who, fleeing from those provinces in Africa which were at that time ravaged by the Vandals, repaired to Rome in great numbers, and soon infected many with their strange doctrine, and corrupted others with their more strange practices. And it is. worthy of remark, that in opposing their idolatrous worship of the sun as the throne of God’s power, and the moon as the seat of his wisdom, Leo was led to aim at suppressing the custom that had long obtained among the Christians, of turning to the east when they prayed. He alleged two reasons why the custom should be suppressed, and both deserving of particular notice: the first, because men may easily pass from worshipping God in the sun, to worship the sun itself; for he supposes some, who in his time used to kneel down to the sun, to have paid that respect, not to the sun, but to God in the brightest work of his hands. The second reason he alleged is, because it is a wicked profanation of the worship of the true God to use the . same ceremonies in worshipping him, that are used by the Pagans, when they worship their idols. By the first of these reasons, as Bower in his life of Leo, has justly observed, images ought to be banished from all places of worship, at least for the sake of the gross and ignorant vulgar, who may easily, and commonly do, pass from the worshipping of God, or our Saviour, in an image or statue, to worship the image or statue itself; and it may safely be said, that among the Roman Catholics there is scarce one in a thousand, who does not immediately address in his prayers the image itself, which is rank idolatry. By Leo’s second reason, the far greater part of the ceremonies used at present by the Church of Rome, are evidently condemned, as a wicked profanation of the worship of the true God ; since most of them have been borrowed of the Paganus, as is notorious, and has been demonstrated by Dr. Middleton, in his “ Exact Conformity between Popery and Paganism,” and more recently in Gray’s “ Connection of Sacred and Classical Literature.” By Leo’s exertions some of the Manichzeans abjured their errors, and having first performed the due penance, were received by him into the church. Against those who continued obstinate the imperial laws were put into execution, and they were condemned to perpetual banishment. They deserved, says Leo, a more severe punishment; but to punish them more severely was repugnant to the spirit of the Church, and to that lenity

9. Lastly, the intention of the person making satisfaction is required, where the sufficiency or satisfaction of one is to be applied to the remission of another: but it can never be shewn, that either Peter, or Paul, or any other saint suffered with the intention of cur receiving remission of our sins (as to punishment) by their sufferings. Therefore the third proposition, which supposes a store of satisfactions of the saints transferable to us, falls to the ground.

Argum. 4. If there were a store of merits and sufferings in the Church, (which, as to the merits and sufferings of Christ, is most true, for in Christ there are all treasures) yet it is no privilege of the Pope to distribute and dispense this treasure, by his bulls, to individuals expressly named : and that for the following reasons :—¹⁶²

1. The blood, and the passion of Christ, and the store of his merits, is applied to particular persons by the sole operation of the Holy Spirit producing faith, and by the internal operation of faith laying hold on Christ; but no papal bulls produce faith, nor stir up a man to apprehend its object; therefore they apply neither the blood nor the merits of Christ to men, nor are of any service in the remission of sins. The Pope, then, can do no more for the remission of sins than any other priest: but what is the duty of ministers Paul teaches in 2 Cor. v. 19, God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. He did not grant the power of remitting the punishment of men by bulls even to the Apostles themselves; but he commanded them, by the word and preaching the Gospel, to encourage men to seek for reconciliation and remission in Christ. Indulgences can be of no use to unbelievers, and to believers they are unnecessary ; because their faith applies the merits and sufferings of Christ to their souls.

2. The dispensing of Christ’s blood, and the actual ap- ° plication of his saving merits to a particular person, is entrusted to no man who does not know the person to whom those spiritual benefits are to be imparted; but neither the Pope, nor indeed any other mortal knows this; for God alone knows who are his: therefore God alone bestows indulgences by the application and acceptance of the sufferings of Christ.

3. Real repentance and true contrition of heart, in conjunction with true faith, is more effectual with God in obtaining perfect remission,-than any papal indulgence can be; for God himself is far more bountiful than any Roman Pontiff: but, if we believe the Papists themselves, neither the ordinary penitence of the faithful can obtain, nor is the benevolence of God wont to grant, any other forgiveness than from guilt only: it is not, therefore, very likely, that the Pope by virtue of his indulgences should be able to absolve a man forthwith from the penalty.

4. Whatever a limited agent does, if he exceeds the bounds of his commission, goes for nothing: but the Pope, in pretending to remit by his bulls, those temporal punishments which divine justice requires them to endure, exceeds the bounds of his commission; for God never delegated such authority to him. Punishments of his own imposing for discipline’s sake, he may relax; but those which the Divine justice has determined to exact, he cannot.

5. The Pope cannot de facto absolve any man from those penal chastisements which God is pleased, not uncommonly to inflict, after true repentance ; again, therefore, he boasts falsely of his power by bulls to free men from the temporal punishment of their sins. For when God has determined to chasten any man by disease of body, death of children, or loss of property, no plenary indulgence of the Pope can deliver him at all from these temporal afflictions.

6. The remission of sins is fully set forth in Holy Scripture; but this remission by means of indulgences is (as the Papists confess) authorised neither by the Scriptures or the ancient Fathers, but has been brought into repute merely by the act of the Roman Pontiffs. The Scripture does not speak expressly of indulgences, says Durandus, lib. 4. disp. 20. qu. 3, nor do the holy Fathers say a word about them. Silvester Prierias,¹⁶³ the master of the sacred palace (as they call it), says, the system of indulgences is no where set forth in Scripture. And further, neither Gratian¹⁶⁴ himself, nor the master of the sentences, makes any mention of these empty bulls of the Roman Pontiffs.

Lastly, the Schoolmen themselves cannot agree as to the intrinsic value of indulgences ; wherefore almost all of them advise those who have procured them, to fulfil all the prescribed penances notwithstanding! And they furthermore add, that to render them effectual there must be a reprehended by the Protestant writers. The time and place of Mazolini’s death are equally unknown ; but it is asserted his morals were very relaxed. He was the author of 47 works in Latin, or in Italian, on theology, philosophy, and mathematics: these have long since fallen into oblivion. One of the most popular (for it passed through several editions. in the 16th century) was his Summa Silvestrina, seu Summa de Peccatis aut Casuum Con-‘ scientie, vel Summa Summarum: DBologna,11515, 2 vols. 4to. This, most probably, is the work cited by Davenant. With respect to the admission made by the author as adduced above, Craig, in his * Refutation of Popery,” has given it with an amplitude which the Translator cannot withhold from his Readers. He introduces it thus: “ Sylvester Prierias, in his controversy with Luther, says, That indulgences have not been made known to us by the authority of the Scripture, but by the authority of the Roman Church, and of the Roman Pontiffs, which is greater. Indulgentize auctoritate Romans Ecclesiz, Romanorumque Pontificum quz est major. Thereby constituting the authority of the Pope superior to that of revealed ° Scripture. As his partisans have elevated his personal authority in the Church, far above the authority of revealed Scripture, this has a direct tendency to render Christianity, like Mahometanism, a system of human institution—an invention of man.”—Our Expositor might have added farther, in confirmation of the position in his last Section, an admission of Aquinas, Sum. part. 1. Qu. 1. art. 8et 10, “ Our faith is founded upon revelations made by prophets and apostles. The church has instituted nothing except such things as are not essentially necessary to salvation.” reasonable cause for them: but if they applied to men the merits of Christ, they would procure remission of sins, let the cause of their being granted be ever so trifling. Vid. Gerson, par. 2. tract. de indul.

But now let us meet the arguments of our adversaries. And here they discover a singular hardihood; for though they themselves acknowledge that indulgences cannot be proved from Scripture, yet do they endeavour to wrest many parts of Scripture to this purpose. — As for instance,

1. I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven, Matth. xvi. 19. What was given to Peter was given to the Pope; and from this passage it is evident, that ample powers of absolving, as well from the guilt as the punishment, were given to Peter: Therefore, &c. Cajetan. opusc. tract. 8.

I answer. This power of absolution, if we speak of a man’s own conscience, is exercised by ministers, not in dealing out indulgences, but in the preaching of the Gospel; and that not authoritatively, but declaratively ; which, indeed, the Papists themselves are forced to confess: for they acknowledge that when a man is truly contrite and penitent, his sins are forgiven him, before the form of absolution has been administered.

2. For what I myself forgive, if I have forgiven any thing, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ, 2 Cor. ii. 10. From which passage Aquinas argues thus: I have forgiven, in the person of Christ, signifies the same as if Christ had forgiven. But Christ is able to remit the punishment due to sin, independently of any satisfaction of our own by indulgence: therefore, Paul could, and therefore, also, the Pope can, whose authority in the Church is not a whit less than Paul’s was. Aquin. Suppl.3. part. q. 25. art. 1.

I answer, The Apostle is here speaking of a certain Corinthian who had committed incest; and he exhorts the Corinthians, who had referred the case to him, to receive him back again into the Church, though he had been excommunicated, because he had professed sincere repentance ; and he encourages them to do so by his own example. But Aquinas here seems to imagine that certain penances had been imposed upon this incestuous person for the satisfaction of divine justice, which Paul by his authority had relaxed ; which is altogether foreign to the plain sense of the passage.

3. lam a partaker of all them that fear thee, Ps. cxix. 63. “Therefore satisfactory works done by one may be transferred to others for the remission of sins, Thom. 3. in suppl. quest. 71. art. 1.

I answer, The prophet is here saying nothing more, than that he endeavours to separate himself from the ungodly, and to associate with the godly and faithful: nor did the communication of works of satisfaction enter his mind.— The Schoolmen are in the habit of bringing many other arguments of this sort to confirm this doctrine of indulgences, and of transferring satisfactions from one to another; but they are adapted so ridiculously to this purpose, that they are not worth the trouble of refutation. Passing over their testimonies, therefore, let us come to their arguments.

1. The common blessings of the Church are at the dis- . posal of the head of the Church: but the store of merits of Christ and the saints are the common blessings of the Church, and the Pope of Rome is the head of the Church ; therefore, he may dispense those blessings by his indulgences.

I answer, We admit that the spiritual blessings of the Church are dispensable by the ministers of the Church ; but not in any way they please. “Therefore they are said to dispense these common blessings by preaching, and by administering the sacraments; but not by the sale of indulgences. As to the store, or treasure spoken of, we answer, that it consists of the sufferings of Christ alone, and not in the smallest degree of the sufferings of the saints. And as to the Pope, he neither is head of the Church, nor, if he were, can he, by any vested right, dispose of this store or treasure. For what Cajetan here says is very true, The store of the merits of Christ cannot be interfered with by the Pope, unless to be dispensed in a lawful manner. Cajet. de Indulg. tract. 9. quest. 1. But the dealing them out by bulls is no lawful act, because it is not built upon the command of the Supreme Lord, who directed his Apostles to dispense the merits of Christ to the faithful by preaching the word and administering the sacraments, &c.

2. They who are reconciled to God remain still, after the remission of their guilt, bound to make satisfaction for the remission of the temporal punishment they have deserved ; and this we see proved by many convincing examples in the Scriptures. God forgave David the crimes of adultery and homicide, yet he adds, Because thou hast given much occasion for the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, therefore the child shall surely die, 2 Kings xii. 14, So in Numb. xiv. J have pardoned the sin of the people: nevertheless not one of them shall see the promised land. So again, after God had forgiven David the sin of numbering the people, he nevertheless punished him by sending a pestilence to lay waste the kingdom. From this sort of expressions the Papists conclude that the divine justice exacts satisfaction from us for the ends of punishment, after the forgiveness of the guilt itself; and then they add of themselves, that this satisfaction may be fully made, not only by our own sufferings and merits, but by those which are dealt out at the Pope’s pleasure, from the common treasury.

In answer to all this; I admit that the faithful do experience much chastisement at the hand of God, after he has forgiven their guilt; but I deny that the intention of these chastisements is to satisfy divine justice. Although God absolves all true penitents from all satisfaction by punishment, for the sake of Christ’s death, yet he does not excuse them from all salutary and chastening visitations. There is then a fallacy in the consequence, when the Papists draw this inference—The faithful, after their sins are forgiven them, endure temporal punishments ; therefore they endure them to satisfy the wrath of God. Another end, therefore, being assigned, this sophism is solved. Augustine specifies three purposes, viz. The exhibition of the misery due to sin, the amendment of our sinful lives, and the necessary trial of our patience ; Tractat. in Joan. 124. But now what the Papists have been pleased to set forth in addition, viz. that men may by indulgences be absolved from these temporal punishments, which otherwise, by every rule of divine justice, they ought to have been subjected to, is very plainly refuted from the above cited passages. For the Pontiff, by all the powers of his bulls, can neither defend the true penitent from the death of children, nor from a general pestilence, nor inflict any other chastisement than such as is according to the good pleasure of God.

3. From that communion of saints, which is an article of our Creed, they argue, that the satisfactory works of the saints which were not immediately wanting for their own individual expiation, are laid up in store for the public benefit, and from thence may be dispensed by the Pope, who is appointed treasurer of this fund.

I answer, They assume two false hypotheses ; one, of the superabundance of the merits and sufferings of the saints ; the other. of the power of the Pope; both of which we have already refuted. As to the foregoing inference from the communion of saints, we assert, that this communion consists in our participation of one God, one ] Christ, one baptism, one spiritual life, and, finally, of the same mystical union with one Head, and with each other; and not in the communication of satisfactions. And the reason is evident, because to make satisfaction for another, and to liberate him from the punishment which divine justice requires, is a work of mediation, not of simple love. The offices of charity are indeed common amongst all the members of the same body; the offices of a Mediator can be performed by no one member to another, but proceed from the Head alone to all the other parts; for he alone is the Mediator between God and men.

In the last place, to return from our digression, from this passage of Paul which we are now considering, and which was the occasion of my discussing this controversy, Cajetan argues as follows; Holy men suffered with the very view and intention of making satisfaction thereby for others ; for Paul expressly says, that he was filling up that which remained of the sufferings of Christ, for his body’s sake which is the Church. And the Rhemish doctors infer from it that the penal works of one member do make satisfaction for others.

I answer, Paul’s real meaning we have already explained, viz. that he bore his many afflictions for the Church, not to expiate sins, but for its edification and confirmation in the doctrine of the Gospel. When, therefore, they argue that from the circumstance of Paul having suffered many afllictions for the Church, he did so to make satisfaction to God for the Church, their argument is absurd ; for we have assigned other causes for it. But we will confirm this our interpretation by the testimony of Anselm, and then conclude. J fill up, says he, those things which are wantwg. But to whom (or where) are they wanting? In my body. For in the body of Christ, to which the Virgin gave birth, no suffering was wanting ; but in my body a part of his sufferings yet remain, which I endure daily in behalf of his universal body, which is the Church. For if I ceased to teach the faithful, I should not sustain these sufferings from those who are without faith: but inasmuch as I am always endeavouring to benefit the Church, I am always forced to endure afflictions. Such is Anselm’s interpretation.¹⁶⁵ From which it appears that Paul suffered those afflictions for the Church, that he might thereby continually instruct the Church, not that he might make satisfaction for the sins of its faithful members.

But let us leave these Papists to their dreams about human merits, and their delusions of Papal indulgences, and return to the explanation of the context.¹⁶⁶

Verse 25.

‘This verse is a continuation of the foregoing one, in which the Apostle professed the state of mind in which he endured the afflictions laid on him for preaching the Gospel; viz. that it was composed and cheerful ; and for which he assigned two reasons. The former derived from his conformity with Christ; I fill up in my body that which remains of the sufferings of Christ ; i. e. by suffering I am made like unto Christ: therefore I rejoice in those things which I suffer. The other reason is derived from the benefits accruing to the Church by his sufferings, I endure afflictions for his body the Church ; therefore I must and will rejoice in these my sufferings. Now in this verse 25, he adds a third reason why he should be so ready and willing to bear any thing whatever for the Church; and it is derived from the nature of his office, IT am made a minister of the Church by God’s ordinance; therefore, so long as I can be of use to the Church, I ought to rejoice in my afflictions.

In explanation of this verse there are four points to be considered :

1. The office itself to which Paul was appointed, described in these words, of which I am made a minister.

2. Who assigned this office to him; viz. God himself: he was appointed, xara v5 v oimovouiav Océ, according to the dispensation or arrangement of God.

3. Those whom this office of Paul regarded; viz. the Gentiles, and amongst them the Colossians ; it is given to me for you, &c.

4. What was the scope and purpose of this appointment, viz. to fulfil the word of God.

Of which Church 1 am made a minister.] Minister, or diaxovos, is sometimes a general term, designating any person discharging any office; sometimes a particular one, restricted to those who had the care of the revenue of the Church and of the poor committed to them ; such were those seven who were set over that business, Acts vi. 3.¹⁶⁷

In this verse it is used in that more extensive signification; yet so as not to express any thing less dignified than the Apostolic ministry: for the office committed to Paul was the apostleship, as appears from the words. For he does not say that he is made a minister of this or that particular Church, but of the Church universal, namely of that which in the foregoing verse he had called the body of Christ. Now from this mention of his office, and this title of minister which Paul assumes, let us deduce a few observations.

1. The circumstance that Paul, who was constituted an Apostle, should speak of himself as a Minister of the Church, is an excitement to those who have obtained the higher situations in the Church, to activity ; and admonishes them to think more of their duties than their honour; and of the task imposed upon them, rather than the dignity attached to it. We, alas! on the contrary, are more willing to be called pastors, than studious to be such: we avoid the labours of our office, but are eager to obtain its honours, as Prosper lamented of old, De vit. contemp. lib. i. vcap.21. But we should always recollect, that the very term minister, is rather a title of labour than of dignity. -

2. We also infer hence, that those who have the superiority in the Church, have but a ministry, and not an absolute dominion. I am made a MINISTER of the Church, says the Apostle, not, a lord. Ministers should not, like earthly potentates, lord it, either over the persons or the consciences of Christians. This Peter forbids in 1 Epis. v. 2, 9, Feed the flock of God which is among you, not as being lords of the heritage, but being examples to the flock. And Paul expresses his aversion to it, 2 Cor. i. 24, Not that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers, &c. The Roman Pontiff, therefore, who makes himself, not the minister, but the lord and God of the Church, is no successor either of Paul or of Peter. For, he desires to rule, at least by an indirect dominion, over both the persons and property of all Christians, and even of kings themselves ; and by a direct dominion over their faith and consciences, as far as he imagines that he is constituted a spiritual monarch. Hence came those extravagances of the Papists, that the Pope is superior to all councils; that the Pope is infallible in matters of faith ; that those who do not submit to the Roman Pontiff are not in a state of salvation; that all interpretation of Scripture is to be derived from the repository of his breast; with many other absurdities of this nature, From all which it is clear that he claims not for himself the pastoral office in the Church, but assumes kingly dominion.

3. Inasmuch as Paul assigned the ministerial office laid upon him, as a reason why he ought to rejoice in his afflictions; he wished to impress upon all ministers of the Gospel, that nothing can be more joyous, or truly honourable, than unjust persecution, whilst they are discharging, and because they do discharge the duties of their calling. For as wounds, and even death itself, are glorious to a soldier in defence of the post in which his commanding officer has stationed him ; so is it the glory of a minister, to suffer afflictions, nay even death itself, in the discharge of that ministry which Christ has committed to him.

But here we must always remember that consolation attends upon those afflictions, of which we may say with Paul, I suffer these things for the Church, and because I am a minister of the Church. But it is a very different thing indeed, when a man must confess, I suffer these things from the Church, and because I am a disturber of the Church. Let none of you suffer… as an evil-doer, or as a busy body in other men’s matters: but if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God on this behalf, 1 Pet. iv. 15, 16. And thus far as to the office itself: It next follows as to the Author of the office.

According to the dispensation of God.] The Apostle shews in these words the authority by which he was made a minister of the Church, viz. by the ordinance of God himself. In this place, then, by the words, the dispensation of God, he understands a lawful and defined power given to him by God for dispensing and administering the spiritual things pertaining to the Church. For the Church is the household of God; nor has any person a right to interfere in it in any way ; but all things are to be done according to the arrangement of God himself. So the Apostle observes to the Hebrews, v. 4, No man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. We learn, therefore, from this word óixovouías, that the Church is like a family; that God is the master of this family ; that the apostles, the bishops, the presbyters, and deacons are the servants and ministers of God in carrying on the business of the family.

Hence observe,

1. Since the Church is the household of God, no one ought to exercise any function in it but by the legitimate calling of God himself. Now a legitimate calling is either extraordinary, such as that of the Apostles was formerly.; or ordinary, such as that of bishops and ministers is now; and this ordinary calling ought to be given, under some visible sign, by those who have ecclesiastical and rightful jurisdiction, that it may be known to the Church : which is observed by all Churches in the ordination of ministers. They who receive orders in this manner have a right to affirm, that they are made ministers according to the dispensation of God. They who have not received this ordination . are but intruders into the concerns of another man’s family without either the appointment or the approbation of the master.

2. Since ministers are appointed in. the Church according to the dispensation of God, we are to understand, that what they both teach and do is not valid from their sole command and mere arbitrary authority, but by the delegated authority and approbation of the supreme Lord, i. e. of God himself. For that which a minister does contrary to the will of the Lord, can never stand good; for he is bound to dispense such things, and in such a manner as the Lord hath directed.

3. Since in every arrangement and the management of any family, it is requisite there should be order, not only with respect to the service itself, but also with respect to the servants themselves, if they are numerous; it is evident that those are disturbers of the Church of God, and derange this economy who endeavour to introduce equality of ministers into the Church. For order, according to the correct definition of the Schoolmen, is the distribution of similar and dissimilar things, assigning to each its proper place ; and wherever there is a plurality without order, confusion immediately arises. Now, according to this arrangement and economy of God, one is appointed a bishop, others are ordained priests, others deacons; nor ought those who are placed in inferior situations to assume those functions which belong to their superiors. For the Lord himself of the family gave some Apostles; and some Evangelists ; and others Pastors and teachers, Ephes. iv. 11 ; and in place of those, it was his will that ministers should be substituted for ever, distinct in their proper orders.

4. Since God has shewn such care in regulating the administration of the Church, it is the duty of each individual in it, both to know and to do what belongs to his department, by virtue of this divine arrangement. For, as Durandus rightly observes, Lib. 2. disp. 9. quest. 1, Without order, action is presumption ; without action, order is negligence; but without knowledge, both action is dangerous and order useless. Hence also that saying of the Saviour, Matt. xxiv. 45, Who then is that faithful and wise servant, whom his Lord hath made ruler over his household, &c. This dispensation of God committed to his ministers, requires both faithfulness to will, and wisdom and knowledge to perform, the duties assigned to them in this economy of God.

And thus far concerning this ministry, and the Author and Ordainer of it, viz. God himself.

Which is given to me for you.] Now, in the third place, we must explain to whom this ministry, or dispensation, which was delegated to Paul by God himself, had relation. It is given to me, he says, for, or on account of you; i.e. you Gentiles ; amongst whom the Colossians are included. The Apostle seems desirous of shewing, that he taught them in his own right, as a part of the Gentile Church, which was particularly entrusted to him. That this ministry of instructing the Gentiles was indeed entrusted to Paul, is evident from many passages of Scripture: As Acts xxii. 21, Depart, for I will send thee far hence unto the Gentiles. And Rom. i. 5, We have received the Apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations. Whence he says, 1 Tim. ii. 7, that ke is ordained a preacher, and an Apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

But here it may be questioned how this dispensation of God can be said to be given to Paul towards or for the Gentiles, and not for the Jews also, and so not for all mankind; since the Apostolic office includes plenary and universal power, unbounded and unlimited. For this is assigned by express commands to the Apostles, Teach all nations; Preach the Gospel to every creature, This is resolved as follows :

The Apostles were not confined by virtue of their Apostolic vocation to particular districts or nations; but as it was very inconvenient for the same men to traverse all countries; one undertook the management of this, and another of that province, either by Divine intimation, or by a private arrangement among themselves. Thus, in the Epistle to the Galatians, ii. 7, the Gospel of the uncircumcision is said to have been committed to Paul, the Gospel of the circumcision to Peter ; because Paul was employed in de- . claring the Gospel to the Gentiles, Peter to the Jews; and that by a certain special appropriation from God.

But here it is necessary also to add, that this appropriation, as we call it, did not at all diminish the Apostle’s authority, or prevent Paul’s preaching to the Jews, or Peter to the Gentiles, if occasion should offer itself. Of Paul, indeed, it is expressly said, that he was a chosen vessel to bear the name of God before the Gentiles and the children of Israel; and he taught the Hebrews by an Epistle, as is commonly held.¹⁶⁸ Nor is there any doubt but that Peter, both at Antioch and in other places, instructed not only the Jews, but also the Gentiles in the doctrine of the Gospel. The general Apostolical power, therefore, respected all nations alike, but the convenience of the Church required that particular persons should be assigned to certain provinces.

And here let us observe how useful and even necessary is this institution of the Church, that certain ministers be attached to certain places and congregations. For if it pleased God that the Apostles, who, by virtue of their calling, might exercise their pastoral charge equally over the whole world, should nevertheless be especially set over certain particular provinces ; how much more proper is it for those pastors who have not the calling which the Apostle had, to be destined to particular churches marked out for them, that they may be able to say, in superintending that flock, a dispeusation is given to me for vov ?

Those, therefore, who would encourage a vagrant and itinerant ministry, in direct opposition to the canons of the ancient Church, which have decreed that no man shall be ordained without a specific title, outrage all reason. Let every man, therefore, understand towards whom a dispensation of the Gospel is given to him, that he may be able to attend to that flock over which the Holy Ghost has made him an overseer, as we read in Acts xx. 28. And thus much as to the object of the Apostolic ministry.

To fulfil the word of God.] In these words the Apostle states the end or design which God intended in assigning to him this dispensation of the Gospel towards the Gentiles. But these words are explained by interpreters in two ways. Some say, that to fulfil the speech, or the word of God, means, fully to expound the whole doctrinal system of salvation, and to promote it to the last moment of life. As if the Apostle had said, I must not be deterred either by afflictions, or bonds, or even death itself, from preaching the Gospel; for God hath laid on me this charge of the Gospel for the very purpose of my striving unto death in defence of it. If we adopt this meaning, there are two things to be learnt from it:

1. That a minister is bound not to preach the word vaguely, but expo, Tov aoyov, fully to explain and to teach every thing that concerns the salvation of his flock.

2. That to preach the whole counsel of God is not sufficient, without our persevering in the discharge of this duty even to the end. Many are fervent and constant in their preaching at the beginning of their ministry, but afterwards grow cold and self-indulgent ; but this is not to Julfil, but only to begin the preaching of the word.

Others explain to fulfil the word of God, to mean the completing those promises concerning Christ and the calling of the Gentiles which the ancient prophets had foretold. As if the Apostle had said, God has made me an Apostle to you Gentiles, that he might fulfil what he had promised by the prophets, to wit, the offer of salvation by Christ. Such was that word of God, Isa. ix. 2, The people who walked in darkness have seen a great light ; upon them that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, hath the light shined. And of the same nature is that passage in Zech. ii. 11, Many nations shall be joined unto the Lord, and shall be my people; and I will dwell in the midst of thee. To make good this word of God, a dispensation of the Gospel was given unto Paul for the Gentiles. If we follow this interpretation, we are thence enjoined, that as God, by calling us Gentiles to the knowledge of the Gospel, hath fulfilled his part; so we, in return, are bound to make good our part by believing, by obeying, and by walking in the light of the Gospel.

Verses 26, 27.

These verses have the same end in view as the foregoing, viz. to confirm the Colossians in the doctrine of the Gospel; and this the Apostle executes by highly extolling its dignity. Inthe former of them he magnifies it, and at the same time excites them to embrace it, by two considerations: 1. By its antiquity and rarity; the mystery hidden from ages and generations. 2. By its manifestation and the present opportunity ; but now is made manifest, Kc.

In the latter verse he accomplishes two objects. He shews the cause of this manifestation, viz. the will of God. Then he explains more fully what was manifested : first generally ; the riches of this glorious mystery: then he explains particularly, what are those riches, or, as it is in the Greek, wis 6 vr^óvrog TOU mustypiou TOUTE; what is the riches of this mystery, viz. Christ himself dwelling in us by faith ; for thus he becomes to us the hope of glory.

Let us begin, then, with the former verse.

Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and. generations.] Here let us consider, 1. What the Apostle understands by a mystery. 2. Where it was hidden. 3. From whom it was hidden.

1. A mystery is a religious secret containing some concealed meaning. And a thing is concealed from us, either by the intervention of some other object, or by its positive distance from us. We must moreover know, that the word mystery is sometimes applied, in the Scriptures, to express the summary of our Christian faith in the person, the nature, and the offices of Christ; as, for instance, in 1 Tim. i. 16, Without controversy great is the mystery of godliness. God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. Sometimes also it is used, by the figure synecdoche, to express a part only of this mystery, viz. the calling of the Gentiles, and their incorporation into the Church without either circumcision or the other works of the law. The Apostle is speaking of this, Eplies. iii. 3, 5, 6, God hath made known to me the mystery, which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men; that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promises by the Gospel, In this sense Paul uses the word mystery in the passage before us, viz. for the secret counsel of God concerning the salvation of the Gentiles by the grace of the Gospel in Christ : and this is that mystery for the promulgation of which Paul was made a minister.

2. But where and how was this mystery concerning the salvation of mankind by Christ hidden It was hidden, as was slightly touched upon before, in the secret and eternal purpose of God ; for God himself decreed, even from all eternity, to conceal and hide from us this mystery, even until the fulness of the time should come. Therefore was it laid up and removed to a great distance from us. For what can be further removed from human sight, than that which is hid in the secret repository of God’s will? Hence it is termed by the Apostle, in Rom. xvi. 25, the mystery kept secret since the world began. But there was also an interposed veil, as it were, of the legal ceremonies, under which the mystery of future redemption was but darkly intimated even to the Jews themselves.

3. And now, in the third place, if it be enquired from whom was this mystery hidden; we do not hesitate to answer, that the clear knowledge of it was hidden, not only from the Gentiles and the Jews, but even from the angels themselves. As to the Gentiles, who, before the coming of Christ, were sitting in the shadow of death, there is no doubt , but that they neither understood nor expected this eternal life, which Christ brought with him for his people. How indeed could they, when the predictions of the Messiah which was to come, were sealed up from them in the sacred Scriptures, and these divine oracles themselves regarded as the peculiar property of the Jews? David, therefore, says, in Ps. cxlvii. 19, 20, He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel: He hath not dealt so with any nation, and as to his judgments they have not known them. From the Gentiles, therefore, was this mystery absolutely and totally hidden.

With respect to the Jews also, who lived under the Old Testament, this mystery was partly and comparatively hidden from them. Partly, because, with the exception of the prophets and a few inspired men, the general mass of the Jews, though they did expect the Messiah, expected him only as coming to themselves ; they never thought of his being intended for the Gentiles. The calling of the Gentiles, therefore, was a mystery altogether hidden from the greatest part of the Jews. Then, as to those very prophets and more enlightened Jews, to them also this grace of the Gospel was a hidden mystery, speaking comparatively. For those prophetical revelations were but like a candle shining in a dark place, in comparison of the declarations of the Evangelists, which are like the shining of the mid-day sun. They looked to this future calling of the Gentiles, but only, as through the twilight, very indistinctly ; we look directly upon it in the clear and open daylight. To this it must be added, that they had only a general notion of the Gentiles receiving some sort of blessing in the promised seed, at some future time; but they had no notion whatever of their being admitted into the covenant of the sons of God in this manner, that is, without circumcision, and without any kind of obedience to . the Mosaic ritual. And this we are authorised to conclude from the circumstance of the Apostles themselves not immediately comprehending this great mystery, even after they had received their commission to preach the Gospel to every creature. For Peter would not have ventured to go in to the uncircumcised, unless God had previously communicated this mystery to him, and given him the knowledge of it by a supernatural revelation. For thus he expresses himself, Acts x. 28, Ye know how it is unlawful for a man that is a Jew to go in (o one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

In the last place, not even the angels clearly understood this mystery of Gospel grace. For to the principalities and powers in heavenly places, hath been made known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God; according to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord ; Ephes. iii. 10, 11. This body of the Church, therefore, composed of Jews and Gentiles, of circumcised and uncircumcised, inasmuch as it was a mystery concealed from all eternity in the secret will of God, was to the very angels a new and wonderful thing.

Observe 1. The doctrine of the Gospel is a sacred mystery; therefore it ought to be received with reverence and purity both of heart and ears. The Gentiles drave all profane and impure persons from their sacred mysteries ; how much more becoming is it that every kind of impurity should be discarded from these saving mysteries? The law commands all men, says Cicero, 2 De legibus, to approach the sacrifices with purity: But the Gospel is, indeed, a sacred secret; therefore, let both the preacher and all his hearers approach it in purity both of mind and body.

2. The Gospel was a mystery concealed from all eternity ; therefore it had existed from all eternity ; and, consequently, is not a new invention of the Apostles, as the Athenians called it when they took Paul to task for preaching it, saying, Acts xvii. 19, 20, May we know what this new . doctrine whereof thou speakest is? for thou bringest certain strange things to our ears. The Gospel might indeed sound new in the ears of the Athenians ; in itself, however, it was not new, but eternal: for in religion nothing but what is false is new. Wherefore, in the Apocalypse, xiv. 6, it is called the everlasting Gospel.

3. Since it pleased God that this saving Gospel should be concealed from the whole world for so many ages, the very novelty of its manifestation ought to stimulate us to a serious contemplation of it; for if other jewels derive their value from their rarity only, as Tertullian observes, surely this jewel of the Gospel, which not a single being had a clear view of during a period of almost four thousand years, is much more valuable.

Thus far, then, as to the Gospel having been a hidden mystery from all eternity: now let us discuss its revelation and manifestation.

But now is made known to his saints.] Three points may here be remarked upon. 1. Why this mystery was manifested. 2. When. 3. To whom.

1. The Apostle says, that this mystery was manifested, not discovered, or brought forth to the light by our labour; to the end that we might understand that no human ingenuity was ever able to penetrate or gain access to this mystery of human salvation. Unless, therefore, God himself, who at first concealed it, had thought fit spontaneously to reveal it, the whole human race must have Jain in endless night ; no man could have known, none would have sought, for the Redeemer of the world.

A twofold reason may be assigned for the necessity of this manifestation, arising on the one hand, from the nature of the things revealed, on the other, from the nature of the human understanding. The things revealed, viz. the mysteries of our salvation in Christ, are supernatural, and dependant entirely on the mere will and dispensation of God. As, for instance, the incarnation of God, the atonement made for sin by his death, salvation by grace through faith in this Mediator, are all of a nature that never could have entered into the human mind, unless God himself had manifested his intention of delivering mankind by these means: for they were all dependant on the free will of God, and not upon any connexion of natural causes.

Now, as to the human understanding; so entirely is it obscured in the thick darkness of sin, that it is not merely dim-sighted, but totally blind to all spiritual perceptions. The natural man perceiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, lCor.ii.14. There is, therefore, a necessity of a Divine manifestation. Augustine, Hypog.3, beautifully remarks, Let no man boast of having engendered faith in his heart by the soundness of his own reasonings ; but let him acknowledge that both before the Law, and under the Law, and since the abrogation of the Law, the faith which is in Christ Jesus is savingly revealed to every man by the illumination of grace, which is from God the Father. For, as Gerson correctly observes, par. 3, The eye of the soul is become turbid through the infection arising from sensuality, through the cloudiness in the animal faculties, and through blindness in the intellectual. Therefore, to sum up the whole; The mystery of the Gospel is above nature; it depends on the eternal and secret counsel of God. The human mind, through sin, is deteriorated beneath its natural sphere; its eye is stained, overclouded, and totally blinded: Therefore this mystery could never have been comprehended by us, unless it had been made manifest by God.

From this I shall draw only one conclusion :

It is the extreme of fully to construct a Christian creed out of philosophical principles; since the doctrine of salvation revealed by the voluntary act of God, could not have been discovered by any acuteness of human intellect. Here, then, the Scholastic doctors, and the Papists who tread in their footsteps, have erred most egregiously, obtruding many dogmas, derived not from divine refation, but from the arguments of blind reason, as articles of the Christian faith. Of this nature are free-will, inherent righteousness, the merits of works, and a great many more, all to be found in the Ethics of the Philosopher; none in the Epistles of Paul. Here, then, that warning of the Apostle, Col. ii. 8, may properly be introduced ; Beware lest any man deceive you through philosophy. For, as Tertullian, advers. Marc. lib. 1, truly asserts, AZ heresies have drawn existence from the brains of Philosophers.

Thus much, then, as to the manifestation itself: Now let us proceed to notice the time when it was made. :

Secondly, the Apostle says, Now this mystery is made manifest. By using this adverb of time, the Apostle takes occasion to press upon the Corinthians the present opportunity, which he much wished them to seize; as though he would say, That which was concealed from all the past ages, could neither be known, nor received by them, to their salvation ; but being by the free grace of God, manifested and revealed to you, through the Apostles, at the present time, it both ought, and may be, at the present time, acknowledged and received by you.

Observe l. It is incumbent on all Christians to take advantage of present time and opportunity, according to that exhortation, Heb. iii. 15, To-day, whilst it is called today, if ye will hear his voice harden not your hearts. For if we reject the Gospel, the condemnation which awaits us to whom it Las been manifested, will be greater than that of those who lived in the past times, and from whom it was concealed.

2. Inasmuch as the Apostle says, it is now made manifest, he at once stops the objections of all who exclaim that the doctrine of salvation is a difficult and dark doctrine. Time was when the mystery of the Gospel was hidden, but now it is plain to be seen, and even courts observation: If our Gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lust, 2 Cor. iv. 3. We admit, indeed, that certain passages of Scripture are difficult of comprehension ; but whatever is laid down as necessary to salvation, is plainly and clearly revealed by the Apostles to the whole world. So thought all the Fathers, whatever Sophists may prate to the contrary. We shall select a few testimonies out of many. Clemens Alexandrinus, in Protrept. calls the Scripture, the sun of the soul. The light, says he, is common to all, and the word is hidden from mone. There is no Cimmerius in the word.¹⁶⁹ Augustine, lib. 2, De doctr. Christ. cap. 9, says, Every thing which pertains to faith and moral practice, is found in those parts of Scripture which are plainly expressed. Chrysostom, Hom. 3. De Lazaro, says, The Philosophers wrote with obscurity ; bul the Apostles and Prophets, on the contrary, set forth all things openly and clearly, and as general teachers of the world, brought them down to the level of all capacities, that every man might be able to learn for himself what was spoken by merely reading them. To these testimonies of the Fathers we may also add that of Gerson, par. 1 : The literal sense of Scripture expresses plainly enough every thing necessary for salvation. From these extracts, then, we may collect, what enormous guilt the Popish Prelates bring upon themselves, who, under the lying pretext of obscurity (as if really the mystery of salvation were not laid open) snatch the Evangelical books out of the hands of the people, and thrust their own wild fantasies and traditions into their places. But we assert that the mystery of salvation is now laid open in the doctrine of the Apostles, and that no man lias a right either to conceal the Gospel, or to force new mysteries of salvation in its place.

To his saints.] The Apostle in these words points out fo whom the Gospel was manifested.

Now some understand the word sainfs to mean those whom God decreed to be consecrated in Christ Jesus, 1. e. the elect. Others restrict its meaning to the Apostles, the Evangelists, and such like, gifted with the spirit of prophecy ; to whom God directly manifested this mystery, that they might be his Ministers in revealing the same to all the world: They suppose that these are called saints by way of eminence. If we adopt the first sense and interpretation, we must not apply it to every kind of revelation, but only to that which is effectual, and brings salvation home to the hearts of the hearers ; which produces not a mere knowledge of Christ, but, at the same time, a real trust in Christ thus known. For in this way was the Gospel manifested to the saints alone, according to the words of Isaiah, liii, 1, Who hath believed our report, and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? Which words are accordant with that declaration of the Saviour, Matth, xiii. 11, To you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of hea- . ven, but to them it is not given. To hear, indeed, is given and granted to all; but to know unto salvation, is given only to the saints and the elect. Hence we may deduce two points of doctrine :

1. It is no disparagement to the dignity or the truth of God, that the numbers of those who really believe, and in their hearts embrace the truth, is small; for though, like seed, it is sown universally, yet it strikes root only in the hearts of the elect, in which the Holy Spirit powerfully operates. For all men have not faith, 2 Thess. in. 9. But if any man be of God, he heareth God’s words, John viii. 47; because he himself opens the hearts of the elect, that they give heed to the Gospel, Acts xvi. 14. Gregory says, Unless the Holy Spirit be in the heart of the hearer, useless are the words of the preacher. And in the same strain Augustine remarks, Many hear, but those only are persuaded to whom God speaks i; wardly.

2. Wisdom unto salvation belongs only to the saints and to the godly: the ungodly and the unholy have the mystery of salvation preached to them, but they do not receive it, unto salvation; for hearing they do not hear, and understanding they do not understand. Wisdom does not enter into a wicked heart, nor will dwell in a body that is subject to sin. For the Holy Spirit of discipline will flee deceit, Wisdom. Ch. i. ver.4. True wisdom in the mysteries of God is ever accompanied with sanctity, but iniquity with folly.

But, as was before stated, others understand by the word saints, the Apostles, &c. to whom that hidden mystery was manifested in some extraordinary manner. If we admit this explanation, we must understand an extraordinary and immediate manifestation by the Holy Spirit; for the Holy Spirit revealed the mystery of salvation to the Apostles immediately, that through the medium of their ministry it might be revealed to all others. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you. John xiv. 26.

That we, then, may obtain the full meaning of the Apostle, let us unite these separate interpretations in one, and conclude thus: This mystery is manifested primarily to the Holy Apostles, and secondarily to other saints ; immediately to the Apostles, mediately to all the servants of God.

Verse 27.

Having treated in the foregoing verse on the concealed and manifested mystery of salvation, let us now proceed with the Apostle, who does three things in this one verse :

1. He adds the reason why that mystery, hidden from so many ages past, should now be revealed to the saints.

2. He distinguishes this mystery of salvation, as he proceeds, with new encomiums, viz. riches and glory.

3. He states specifically what are the riches and what is the glory of this saving mystery ; namely, Christ himself dwelling in us by faith.

As for the first ; the Apostle adds the reason of this divine dispensation, for the purpose of answering an implied objection. For it might be asked, If this doctrine of the Gospel be the doctrine of salvation, why was it not made known to the world during so many ages? Why even now is it made known effectually only to the elect and to those who are sanctified by the Spirit? The Apostle gives no other reason for this distinction than the will of God: This mystery was made manifest to those to whom God was pleased to make it known. The same will of God, therefore, is the cause both of that concealment, by which the Gospel was hidden from the ages gone by ; and of that revelation by which it is now made manifest to his saints.

Some persons fondly pretend, that that barbarous age was not fit to receive such mysteries; but that in this its more matured period, the world became wiser, and more capable of receiving the doctrine of salvation. But this supposition is grounded on a false hypothesis ; for the grace . of God does not find, but make men fit for receiving grace. Others again imagine, that God in mercy refrained from revealing the doctrine of salvation to those ancient times, because he foreknew that they would reject it. But this reasoning also is refuted by experience ; for the foreknowledge of human pride and infidelity does not stop the promulgation of the Gospel. Nay more, God suffers it to be preached expressly to many to whom it is the savour of death unto death, 2 Cor. ii. 16. So that it is useless to seek for, or to give any reason why the mystery of salvation was so long hidden from so many nations, and why it was afterwards revealed, beyond that of God’s will, Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways, Acts xiv. 16. Hence then let us learn,

1. How rash is that maxim of the Schools, viz. That it is a part of Divine Providence to provide for every man the necessary means of salvation. For since the revelation of a Mediator is absolutely necessary for salvation, and yet no provision was made for the revelation or knowledge of this Mediator for so many generations of mankind ; either their assertion is false, or the Providence of God defective. For, as Augustine truly observes, De civit. lib. 18. cap. 47, Salvation is not to be granted to any man except to him to whom has been revealed, by the will of God, the one Mediator between God and man—Christ Jesus.

2. That notion of the Schools is also of very dubious import, viz. That there is no man who does the best in his power to whom God will not reveal what is necessary for his salvation, Durand. lib.2, As is also this, lib. 3, which is nearly akin to it: If a man lives well according to the law of nature, God will supply what is necessary for his salvation. Both these axioms of the Schools are faulty in two respects: First, in the supposition that a man in his natural corrupt state either is able to live well, or to seek after grace. Secondly, in the supposition that a revelation of saving grace is due to those natural works and exertions. Prosper had learnt better things when he said, Ad capit. Gall. resp. 8, It is the part of impiety to teach that the grace by which we are saved, is conferred upon us as the reward of our good works, or is withheld from us by reason of our bad ones.

Lastly, as the will of God was the only acknowledged cause why the Gospel, after being concealed for so many ages, was afterwards manifested to the whole world; so the same will of God is the cause of its being known effectually to the saints; and of its striking on the ears of the reprobate without fruit. So Paul states in this very passage, It is made manifest to his saints, to whom God would make it known. So also testified the Saviour himself, Matt. xi. 25, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight. This will of God in the effectual illumination of the elect is operative, and, as the Schoolmen express it, has respect to his intention ; and therefore performs whatheapproves. But the case is very different with the unbelieving: for in offering to them the doctrine of salvation, God is also willing that they should receive it; but he wills it with a will approving ; not with a will operating and preducing. Under this persuasion, Prosper, ad Capit. Gall. respons. 5, observes, The effect upon those whose outward ears are sainted by a bodily voice, is u different thing from the effect upon those whose inward sense God hath opened, and in whose hearts he has laid the foundation of faith and the fervour of lovee—And thus far as to the cause of concealment and of the manifestation of this mystery of salvation, viz. the good pleasure of God.

2. What is the riches of the glory of this mystery amongst the Gentiles.] The Apostle here proceeds to set off the mystery of the Gospel now offered to all nations, but effectually made manifest only to the saints, with fresh encomiums, ascribing to it riches and glory: it is a mystery rich, abundant, and withal glorious.

First, as to what pertains to the riches of this mystery, God, in this calling of the Gentiles, has unfolded his spiritual treasures, and offered to men the vast and admirable riches of his mercy, his goodness, and his grace ; as it is expressed, Ephes. 11. 7, Ife shews to the ages to come the ex- . ceeding riches of his grace. Nor are they only offered to us on the part of God; but if we are enrolled amongst his saints, we have actually received those most desirable riches of wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption; 1 Cor. i.30 Speaking of these riches, Christ says, Rev. i1. 18, I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich ; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear. With these riches this mystery of the Gospel is filled.

1. Learn hence, that were it not for this grace of the Gospel, the whole world would be in misery, in want, in beggary. Men, being blind, do not perhaps feel this their spiritual indigence ; but that insensibility does not lessen their want; as it is said Rev. iii. 17, Thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked. Such is the condition of all those who have not yet been made partakers of the riches which the Gospel brought to light.

2. Hence we learn what sort of riches we ought to thirst after, and pursue even with insatiable desire; not, forsooth, the dirty ore dug up from the dirty earth, but those heavenly and spiritual treasures sent down from above. For this grace contained in the mystery of the Gospel, is that pearl of great price, which a wise merchant, when he has once seen, will immediately sell all he has in the world to buy, Matth. xiii. 46, As, then, we should consider the heir of some king, or other rich man, to be mad, who, thinking nothing of all his hereditary property, employed himself in scraping together the ordure from his father’s stable as his riches ; so ought a similar suspicion of madness to attach to any man, who can disregard these riches which his heavenly Father has offered him in the Gospel, and give up his whole heart to scraping together gold and ‘ silver, which, in comparison with the other, are to be accounted as dung. Phil. iii. 8.

Lastly, from the Gospel mystery containing such great riches, an argument may very seasonably be derived in favour of the dignity of the Gospel ministry: For what office can be conceived more honourable than that of Ministers, who are entrusted with the power of dispensing such great and valuable riches? Whoever, therefore, despises these Ministers, does but too plainly prove his contempt of God himself; and, like swine, trample the Gospel pearl under his feet.

Thus much as to the riches of this mystery.

But, as if this were too little in so great a matter as the mystery of our salvation, the Apostle adds, that it is not only a very rich, but also a very glorious mystery ; tis ó macuros Tw; dens, Kc. What is the riches of the glory. Indeed, it is well worthy of observation, that not only in the verses before us, but almost every where else, when he speaks of the riches of this Gospel mystery, he adds something about its glory. Thus Rom. ix. 23, That he might make known the riches of his glory, &c. And Eph. i. 18, he wishes the eyes of their understanding to be enlightened, that they might know what is the hope of the calling of the Gospel, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints.

The Apostle introduces the word glory that he may obviate the scandal which men pretend arises from the contemptibleness of the Gospel: for in the estimation of carnal men, the doctrine of the Gospel seems contemptible. That all men, therefore, may be assured that there is nothing really contemptible in the Gospel, he employs these splendid eulogies to exalt its dignity ; nay more, to shew that it is altogether so glorious as deservedly to claim every kind of honour.

This mystery of salvation, then, contained in the Gospel, is properly called glorious for two reasons; one of which may be considered on God’s part, the other on ours.

On God’s part, because nothing so properly shews forth the divine glory, as does the manifestation of the grace of the Gospel in Christ Jesus. From whence arose that hymn of the angels, Luke ii. 14, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good-will towards men. For as true glory arises from the manifestation of virtue, all the divine virtue and goodness shone forth in the free calling of the Gentiles to salvation by the Gospel. For in it the truth of God, his compassion, his justice, his wisdom shine forth ; ! as might be abundantly proved were we inclined to descant more at large on this general topic. But let us fix upon only one of these virtues, viz. the divine compassion: of which Cicero has well remarked, De Offic. 2, It most redounds to our glory, if ever we have opportunity, of helping a man who appears to be surrounded and borne down by a powerful enemy. To which we may add, that it is more eminently glorious to exert this kindness when neither called upon so to do by the deserts of the individual relieved, nor induced to it by any prospect of remuneration. Now let us apply this observation to the case before us. The whole human race lay prostrate under the tyrannous oppression of that most powerful of all enemies, the devil; but the mystery of the Gospel teaches us, that through the aid of the Divine compassion, and without any previous merit of our own, we are snatched from under the burden of their oppression and set at liberty ; therefore, it best illustrates the glory of God, and most correctly, in this respect, is it called a glorious mystery.

On our part, moreover, it may be called a glorious mystery, because it ensures to believers real and eternal glory ; nay more, by the power of faith it puts them into present possession of it. On this account it is preferred to the law of Moses, 2 Cor. iii. 7, 8, If the ministration of death was glorious, how shall not the ministration of the Spirit be rather glorious? And in the Epistle to the Hebrews, xii. 18; Ye are not come to the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tem- « pet; but ye are come unto mount Zion, and the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels. To this glory the Gospel calls and conducts those who are sanctified and faithful, and, therefore, there is the best of reasons for its being called a glorious mystery.

Now there are two sorts of men which stand reproved by this divine attribute: First, they who endeavour so to interpolate and mutilate the doctrine of the Gospel, as well nigh to obliterate the riches and glory of the divine compassion contained in it. And here it is that the Papists have sinned most grievously ; ascribing, as they do, the power of washing away sin and procuring salvation, to their own merits and satisfactions, free-will, and other absurdities of this sort, and thus concealing this glory of the compassion and free mercy of God, which constitutes this mystery glorious. For this mystery of the Gospel is no longer glorious to God if we may be allowed to boast of our own good works, and to obtain salvation through their merits.

They also are glanced at who, in the profession of the Gospel, neither regard nor look for any thing better than external peace, worldly honours, and temporal accommodations of this kind. This mystery of the Gospel is indeed fruitful, honourable, and glorious ; but it promises fruits of another kind, other honours, and glory of a very different description. It brings with it fruits, not of money, but of righteousness ; honours, not of the world, but of heaven; glory, not of fleeting vanity, but of eternal blessedness. It is, therefore, our business to seek for glory in the way of this glorious mystery ; according to the exhortation of Christ, Matth. vi. 33, Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you. Ye see, then, that the treasures of riches and glory are offered to us in the Gospel: And now let us consider in whom these riches and this glory are vested, and how they are derived to us.

Which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.] The relative which has riches, not mystery, for its antecedent. For the Apostle had been, in the foregoing verses, celebrating the riches, or the abundance of this Gospel mystery; and now he adds, by way of explanation, which riches, or abundance is Christ himself, whose indwelling in you produces the hope of eternal glory. Here, then, two points arise for consideration :

l. ‘That Christ himself is that treasure of spiritual riches which is offered to us in the Gospel.

2. That Christ confers these treasures upon us, as far as he is in us; for thus is he the hope of glory.

There can be no necessity for our taking much trouble to prove that we have i» Christ the hidden treasures of all the ! spiritual goods which are offered us in the Gospel: For in the third chapter of Ephes. vers. $, they are spoken of under the title of the unsearchable riches of Christ. And in Col. ii. 3, the Apostle distinctly asserts, that a// the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hid in Christ. The reason of this is evident; viz. because Christ is the head of the Church; and from the head, as from a fountain, all life and spiritual motion in the inferior members is derived. Nor do we only derive every indwelling grace from Christ, but also the grace of Divine acceptance into life eternal, as far as we are reckoned in Christ the Head, and are found clothed with the garment of his perfect righteousness. In Christ, therefore, all our riches are laid up; in Christ is all our hope of glory.

But inasmuch as it is but too clear and evident, that all men are not made partakers of these riches ; therefore, in the second place, the Apostle adds how Christ is made the treasure of the riches of salvation to men; by what means they have in Christ their hope of glory; namely, as far as he dwells in them, so far they have the hope of glory. But Christ is said to be, or to dwell in any man, when he, by the Holy Spirit exciting faith in the heart, attains to a true knowledge of him, and a living trust flowing from that knowledge. He, therefore, who truly believes all the doctrines concerning the natures, and the union of the natures, and the peculiar offices of Christ; his being, for instance, very God and very man, the Mediator and Redeemer of the human race, and the other points which are revealed in the Word; who, by the inspiration of the same Spirit, is fully persuaded that. Christ is so to him as he is in himself, i. e. his God, his Mediator, Redeemer and Saviour; the man, I say, who implicitly believes these things, dwells in Christ, and Christ in him, and by the operation of his Spirit and of faith, receives all the riches of Christ. Upon this ground, Christ himself plainly declares, in John xv. that when separated from him we are dead as to spiritual life; I am the Vine, ye are the branches: he that abideth in me and 1 in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit. He that abideth not in me, is cast forth as a branch, and is withered. But now, we abide in Christ when bound to him by faith and the Spirit. Now the uses of this are these; ]. Since so long as Christ is not in us we cannot be partakers of his spiritual blessings ; let us labour, by faith in him, to induce him to take up his abode with us: for, as Cyprian truly says, It s by faith, and not by personal contact, we are united to Christ in this life.

2. Since we can have no hope of obtaining glory, either in ourselves, or in angels, or saints, or any where out of Christ alone ; much less let us look for it in our own works. It is an excellent remark of Gerson, in a Poem which he calls * Testamentum Peregrini,” part. 2 ;

Seek not the robe of works:— By blood

And by pollution stained, they will but bring

Confusion too and shame of face.

Let this discussion suffice for those three points which in this verse I proposed to consider ; viz. the cause of the concealment and of the revelation of this mystery which bringeth salvation: the commendations of this mystery ; that it is rich, and glorious: and the person by whom and in whom we are made partakers of all spiritual blessings, viz. by Christ, and in Christ, through the agency of the Spirit, and faith the gift of the Spirit,

Verse 28.

The Apostle has already brought forward many arguments to confirm the Colossians in the doctrine of the Gospel which they had received: here he adds another, drawn from his own labour in advancing it: as if he meant to say, That very same Gospel which Epaphras preached among you, I myself am announcing to the whole world ; which I should not do, were I not certain that it is the only ! doctrine of salvation: Take care, therefore, that ye be not driven away from it.—But I proceed to the exposition of the words themselves by observing, that the Apostle effects three objects :

1. He shews the main subject of his preaching; whom we preach, &c.

2. He points out the manner of his preaching ; warning every man, &c.

3. He declares the aim and intention of his preaching; that we may present every man, &c.

1. Whom we preach.] Whom, namely Christ, the image of God, the Head of the Church, the source of all fulness, the only Mediator and Redeemer of mankind, dwelling in you by faith, and ensuring to you the hope of eternal glory ; this Christ, I say, we preach to you.

In these words, then, the Apostle marks the distinction between his doctrine and that of false Apostles. They were joining angels with Christ, and the works of the law with faith, in the business of salvation: but Paul was teaching that Christ alone was competent to fulfil every part of the office of a Mediator and Redeemer ; and that faith in Christ, not obedience to the law of Moses, procured our salvation. The doctrine, therefore, of this passage is this ;

That they only preach Christ aright and as they ought to do, who teach that all hope of salvation for mankind is laid up in him alone, and who acknowledge that we receive the riches of divine grace through him alone. The other Apostles also preached such a Christ: For Peter, Acts iv. 12, says thus ; There is salvation in no other ; for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved. So Paul declares, Gal. v. 4, Christ is become of none effect to you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

Hence it appears that the Papists do plainly deviate from the purity of the Gospel doctrine, who “unite angels and saints with Christ in the Mediatorial office; intermix their self-righteous works with the perfect righteousness of Christ in the matter of justification ; and incorporate masses, indulgences, and satisfactions of their own contriving, with the blood of Christ in the work of reconciliation. He who makes Christ a sort of half-way Saviour and Mediator, does not in fact preach him, but the chimera of his own brain : for this is a fundamental error in the principal subject of Gospel preaching.

2. Warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom.] Here the Apostle proceeds to describe the manner of his preaching, upon which we must make three observations.

The first is, that the ministry of the Gospel recognises two separate offices, viz. Warning, and Teaching. The word voSeréiy, which the Apostle adopts in this place, seems to me more extensive in its meaning than the Latin word admonendi, warning or admonishing. For it is literally, to put a good mind into a man; which is effected, not only by warning, but by rebuking, comforting, and many other means. Labour, therefore, and attention of every description ina Minister, which is calculated to regulate the affections, and is found practically conducive to that effect, so that the doctrine of salvation may take deep root in men’s hearts, is included under the term vouSec1av. Whether, therefore, we would correct the transgressor, or rouse the negligent, or cheer the desponding, or in short, work upon the will and the affections in any manner, all is included in this first part of a Minister’s duty, viz. vovSérncw Whierefore Clemens, Pzdag. lib. 1. cap. 8, says, that vovSernaig is the prescribed diet for a diseased soul, counselling it to take what is salutary, and cautioning it against what is injurious. This part, therefore, of the ministerial office, is chiefly conversant with the reformation of the morals of men: Nor is it to be despised on the ground of the topics being common and ordinary which are urged by ministers in their exhortations and rebukes. For Seneca wisely observes, What is the use of shewing that which is evident? Much every way. For sometimes we know but pay no attention. Admonition teaches not ; but it warns, it excites, t keeps the memory alive, it prevents the thing from gliding out of sight. We pass I by many objects that are before our cyes ; to admonish is a kind of advice. The mind often neglects what is plain before it ; therefore the notice of things most notorious must be suggested to it. Senec. Epist. lib. 14. Epist. 94.

Another part of Gospel preaching is observable in teaching. But didacxev, to teach, relates to the understanding, as vovüev£w, to warn, does to the will and affections. It is, therefore, a Minister’s duty not only to correct depraved affections and bad morals, but also to enlighten the blind understanding. He ought to be both like salt, to dry up the corrupt humours of the affections; and like light, to dispel the darkness of the mind: the one is done by warning and rebuking ; the other by teaching and instructing.

The doctrine itself also is twofold ; viz. of the law, and of grace: and it belongs to the ministerial office to explain each, and to bring forward all those passages of Scripture which are essential to the full understanding of each, as well as to refute all conflicting errors, As to the doctrine of grace, no one doubts but that it is the special duty of a Minister of the Gospel to unfold all its mysteries; and as to the law, it is evident that he ought to instruct the people of God in the true knowledge of it. For the law is the dictate of the Divine mind, and the rule of the human will and operation; and every one is bound to make himself acquainted with that rule to which his life ought to be conformed.

But in teaching on this point it is so easy to err, that some cautions may be useful. We must be careful, then, in setting forth the doctrine of the law, not to suffer men’s minds to rest upon it, as if they were to obtain salvation by obeying it; but they must be led to the throne of Christ’s mercy by the rigours of the Law: for the Law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.

We must observe also, that the doctrine of the Law is adapted in one way, to those who are faithful and truly penitent, and in another to the reprobate and rebellious. To the godly it should be set forth only as a rule of holy life, by walking in which they obey God; but not that they” should justify themselves thereby : to the ungodly it must be set forth not only for the direction of their lives, but to strike terror into their minds, and shew them the justice of their condemnation, unless they repent and flee to Christ their Mediator.—Thus have we considered the twofold duty of warning and teaching. Now, in the second place, let us see how far this office extends.

Every man.] The Apostle appears to me to reiterate these words for three reasons :

1. To display his Apostolic authority, and the right of which he is possessed, to warn and to teach not only the Colossians themselves, but also those teachers who made it their business to corrupt the purity of the Gospel doctrines.

2. To shew that every distinction between Jew and Gentile was removed, and that the Gospel was open not to one nation only, but to all. Wherefore he says, Rom. i. 14, I am debtor to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians, to the wise and to the unwise.

That he might avow his zeal, and declare how his affections were bent upon the salvation not of this or that man, but of all mankind. — Foras a physician makes it the business of his profession to cure not this or that individual only, but all that he can ; so the Physician of souls exerts himself (as much as in him lies) to give relief to all.

This example of Paul must be imitated by all Ministers of the Gospel; who, though not commissioned like him to teach all nations, yet should be animated with the apostolic purpose of bringing to Christ all those who are committed to their superintendance. This very purpose they ought to exhibit in warning and teaching every man placed under, their ministry. They are not to think lightly of the poor, nor to be intimidated by the great, so as to shrink from their bounden duty both of teaching and warning. Whoever, says Augustine, disobeys the commands of God and disregards reproof, is on that very account to be reproved, because he will not bear reproof. De corrept. & grat. cap. 5.

In all wisdom.] This is the last expression we have to consider as to the manner of apostolic preaching ; viz. that . he had concealed nothing, but had instructed every man in all wisdom. The expression a// wisdom, however, is not to be stretched beyond the limits of the present subject; but only to be applied to all wisdom of a saving nature, or such as is necessary for salvation. He does not profess to teach worldly wisdom, which is attained by the light of reason; but heavenly and spiritual, which is discerned by the light of faith, and is contained in the doctrine of the Gospel. Whatever, then, was necessary to be understood for obtaining salvation through Christ, that the Apostle openly expounded before all men. © That this was Paul’s meaning in this passage, is evident from the collation of other places in which he also declares the same persevering zeal in instructing the Church. In Acts xx. 18, &c. Ye know how I have kept back from you nothing that was profitable to you; but have shewed you and taught you publicly, and from house to house ;. testifying both to the Jews and also to the Gentiles, repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ. Immediately after which he adds, I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men ; for I have not shunned to declare unto you the whole counsel of God; ver. 26, 27.

Hence many inferences might be deduced.

1. The whole sum of Christian wisdom consists in depending upon Christ alone, and understanding the counsel of God concerning our salvation obtained by him. He who sincerely holds this doctrine is accounted as furnished with all wisdom.

2. The Apostles have publicly set forth every thing which is necessary for obtaining salvation in Christ; the obscure traditions, therefore, of which the Papists have so many fables, are no part of that wisdom which is unto salvation. And the reason is obvious: For the wisdom which is necessary to salvation was preached by the Apostles openly to all men; but these traditions of theirs, according to their own account, were not entrusted to all, but only to their prelates, or other eminent men among them. Therefore the knowledge of them is not necessary for the salvation of a Christian. If we consult the Fathers, though they allow of some traditions as to external ordinances, and the indifferent usages of the Church, yet, in all matters concerning faith and salvation, they, one and all, hold that the doctrines of Scripture which the Apostles preached, and afterwards committed to writing, are suflicient. Tertullian, De prescript. says, Since the coming of Christ, there has been no need for speculation ; nor for inquisitiveness since the promulgation of the Gospel. And Augustine, in his comment upon John xi. tract. 49, observes, Those things were selected to be written down which seemed sufficient for the salvation of those who believe. I add no more on this topic now, having touched upon the error before more than once.

3.. The man who is not apt to teach, nay more, who is not able to instruct God’s people in all spiritual wisdom, is not a fit minister of the Gospel. To this end Paul (Tit. i. 9) requires in a spiritual pastor not only the knowledge of sound doctrine, but also the holding it fast, that he may be able to instruct others in sound doctrine, and to convince the gainsayers. But let those who neither can nor will do this, see the heavy guilt that they bring upon themselves by withholding the word of instruction from their brethren, and by depriving dying souls of the remedy of life; as Gregory remarks in Pastorali. ^. Thus, then, have we discoursed of the primary object, and also of the manner of apostolical preaching ; in which the Apostle embraces three things, viz. the warning and doctrine: the persons who ought to be taught, viz. all men: and lastly, the matter which ought to be preached to people, viz. all saving wisdom, And now we will pass on from the manner to the aim or purpose of the Gospel Ministry. =~

That we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus.] Behold, then, the end and aim of Paul, and so, indeed, of every other Minister of the word ; viz. that they may bring all kinds of people to that saving knowledge of Christ in which Christian perfection consists. Now to avoid confusion herein, let us make two separate explanations. The first as to the intention of Paul; the other as to Christian perfection, or the character which constitutes it. i

In respect of the first, then, it is asked, Is not this intention of Paul either extravagant or absurd, it being most certain that the greater part of mankind will not be brought to Christ after all the efforts of the Gospel ministry? For though many are called, yet few come, 1. e. are chosen. Why, then, does he profess an intention which never can be fulfilled ?

I answer, Neither is the Apostle’s intention of bringing all men to Christ, though few will in reality be brought, nor are his endeavours to fulfil it extravagant or vain. That it is not extravagant there are two reasons: I. Because it is in conformity with the rule of Charity, for according to that rule we are to presume favourably of every man until the contrary is shewn: But Ministers have no evidence against any particular man being saved ; therefore they are bound to entertain a good hope for every man, and to do every thing they can for promoting his salvation. 2. This desire is not extravagant, because it is in perfect accordance with the revealed will of God. For that revealed will in the promulgation of the Gospel offers salvation to every man without respect of persons; and no man is excluded, unless he exclude himself by his unbelief. . Agreeable to this statement is 1 Tim. 11.4, God will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. What, therefore, God himself hath declared to be his will in offering the Gospel, the same also ought to be the will of his Ministers in preaching it.

But here another question is raised from the foregoing : If God would have all men to whom he sends the Gospel of salvation to be saved, why are not all saved ; since the will of God, neither in itself nor in the means by which it acts, can be hindered in producing the effect intended ?

A common answer to this question is taken from Augustine: When God is said to will that all men should be saved, we must make a distribution of individuals into classes, not of classes into individuals; so that the sense will be, God wills that some should be saved of every class of men. But to me the commonly received distinction of the Schoolmen between the will of his good pleasure and his visible will (voluntate signi), is better suited to this passage. We therefore reply, that the will of his good pleasure is always effectually fulfilled, because it is formally and essentially in God, and is his practical absolute will, when employed concerning any future good. But his visible will is not always fulfilled, because it is not formally and essentially in God, and is not his absolute and practical will; but, it is his declarative or approbative will (if I may be allowed such a word) towards us. God is, therefore, said to will, by his visible will, the salvation of all, to whom he proposes and offers the Gospel, which is the ordinary means of effecting salvation. Moreover, we are not to inquire into the secret will of God ; but all our actions must be directed according to his revealed will: and we ought, therefore, to wish and aim at the salvation of all those to whom God vouchsafes to grant the saving Gospel.

Neither is the endeavour of the Ministry, in drawing those to Christ who will never come, vain. In the first place, because, whilst they are performing their duty, they are relieving their own consciences. Secondly, because, though the exertions of the ministry in behalf of the reprobate, fail of their intended effect, they abundantly answer their purpose in all those fore-ordained to salvation. Lastly, because by this means infidels and reprobates will be condemned in the day of judgment, and deprived of every excuse for their sins; having disobeyed the calling through the perverseness of their own evil affections.—And thus far as to Paul’s intention.

Now (in the last place) let us consider Christian perfection.

The Schoolmen hold two sorts of perfection ; one of the way, the other of the country, to which the way leads. In this passage the Apostle has the former more particularly in view ; and this is the first point to which the Ministers of the Gospel endeavour to lead their people, that by means of it they may be brought to the attainment of the second.

This perfection of the way may also be considered in a twofold manner. For a man is called perfect who is in : possession of every thing which is necessary for a state of salvation; and so every believer is perfect. A man is called perfect also, who has attained to every degree of grace and virtue; and in this sense no man is perfect: for every Christian always may be, and ever ought to be, growing and advancing in grace and holiness.

But what constitutes the character of Christian perfection? “The Apostle seems to insinuate the answer by adding in Christ Jesus ; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus. When, confessing our own imperfection and corruption, we take refuge in Christ, and by faith lay hold of his perfection, and are renewed by the Holy Spirit into his likeness, then, and not till then, are we perfect in Christ Jesus. The Apostle, therefore, does in effect say, that he labours, by preaching the Gospel, to impress true faith and earnest piety on the hearts of all men.

Hence we infer,

1. That the Ministry is, as it were, the hand of God himself reforming and perfecting men in spiritual life; which, if we speak of the subject of degrees of perfection, is done very gently and gradually. For, as Prosper says, De vita contempl. 1. 9, no man is in this life completely perfect ; for the infirmities of the godly are not yet healed, though they are under the daily process of healing. Hence that address of Paul, Gal. iv. 19, My little children, of whom I travail in birth until Christ be formed in you.

2. Hence also is shewn the empty pride of the Monks in claiming to themselves alone that state of perfection which is within the reach of every true Christian. For it is quite absurd to suppose that a good Christian cannot be in the way of perfection without turning Franciscan or Dominican; when Paul, who wished to present all men perfect in Christ Jesus, yet never attempted to persuade one to bind himself down by any sort of monastic vows and rules. But let us hear that grave theologian John Gerson, who beats down this pride of the Monks upon all occasions. In his work Contra assert. Matthei de Grabbon,¹⁷⁰ part. 1, he maintains the following propositions: l. The Christian religion may be observed perfectly, yea, most perfectly, independently of any vow obliging to counsels of perfection. (This he proves by the example of Christ, the Apostles, and the saints in the primitive Church, who were under no vows or monastic discipline whatever). 2. It zs the height of impropriety, perversion, and, I scruple not to add, arrogance, to call these factitious religious institutes, states of perfection, when it is certain the most imperfect men are pro- Sessors of such obligations. 3. The religion of Christ may be and ought to be observed by the prelates of the Church more perfectly than by the Monks. And in the third part of his work, he brings many arguments to prove that the perfection of a Christian does by no means consist in the vow of celibacy, and poverty, and obedience to the monkish rules, but in the observance of the Divine precepts. Whence also Clemens Alexandrinus, Strom. 7, says, that there is as much perfection to be found in the conjugal as in the monastic life.¹⁷¹ We therefore conclude, that the perfection of which the Apostle is here speaking, does not consist in monastic observances, but in faith, in charity, and in sanctity of life; in all which he who has the greater firmness, ardour, and strength, is to be accounted the most perfect.

Verse 29.

The Apostle amplifies his ministry by a twofold argument: 1. By his great labour, which he intimates under the words labouring and striving. 2. By the effectual assistance of Christ, which he expresses in adding, according to his working, which worketh in me mightily. He employs ] both these arguments for confirming the Colossians in the doctrine of the Gospel. For if Paul propagated this doctrine with all diligence, it ought also to bind the Colossians with equal constancy: If Christ promoted this doctrine by Divine aid, the Colossians ought to adopt the same as the word of God.

Whereunto I also labour, noma.] This Greek word does not simply mean o labour, but to labour vehemently, and even to weariness. He therefore shews, first, from the labour annexed to it, both the difficulty and the dignity of his ministry : for a difficulty which arises from labour increases its value.

How many and how great labours Paul underwent in preaching the Gospel, we may ascertain from the Acts of the Apostles. No one visited more people in preaching ; no one contended more strenuously with the enemies of the Gospel in disputation ; in short, no one in any work of the ministry exercised himself more earnestly by labour. Whence he did not fear to assert, that he had laboured more abundantly than all the other Apostles, 1 Cor. xv. 10. This labour of Paul, then, I refer to all those acts whereby he studied to extend the Gospel. But the Apostle adds, I /abour striving.

*“Aywvigcuevos.] I conceive that this refers to the dangers and sufferings of Paul, which he was often compelled to sustain in the discharge of his Apostolic office. For the metaphor is derived from those wrestlers who contended in the public games, and underwent many severe and arduous struggles in those contests.

If any one would see a catalogue of those sufferings which Paul sustained, let him look into 2 Cor. xi. 23, &c. where he glories that he was in stripes, in prisons, in deaths oft: that he was beaten with rods, stoned; was three times shipwrecked: that he was in perils of waters, of robbers, of the Jews, and of the Gentiles: that he passed his life in watchings, in hunger, in thirst, in cold, and nakedness. Paul contended with all these opponents, and overcame them all by enduring: Whence in 2 Tim. iv. 7, 8, he triumphantly exclaims ; I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness.

Here learn,

1. That they who propose to themselves ease, pleasure, riches, or honour, are not suited for the Ministry of the Gospel. For if the pastors of cattle undertake a laborious life, so that Jacob could truly say concerning the pastoral life, In the day the drought consumed me, and the frost by night ; and my sleep departed from mine eyes, Gen. xxxi. 40, then how much more does it behove the pastors of souls, from whom God will require whatever shall be lost through their indolence, to shrink from no labour? Jf any one desire the office of a Bishop, he desireth a good work, 1 Tim. iii. 15 work, not honour ; labour, not pleasure; says Jerome. They are wicked prelates, says Gregory, who retain the chair of government to enjoy pleasure, not to exercise labour, Moral. lib. xi. cap. 10.

2. That ministers ought to make up their minds, not only to labour in the word, but even to labour for the word under the cross. For the cross is the portion of all the godly, but especially of ministers. Hence said Christ to his Apostles, John xvi. 2, The time will come that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. And in the last verse, In the world ye shall have tribulation. A certain one said, It is princely to have a bad character for doing well: but I should rather say, It is priestly to suffer cruelty for doing well. Hence Paul writing to Timothy unites both, in 2 Epis. iv. 5; Do the work of an Evangelist ; there is labour in execution! endure afflictions; there is firmness in suffering! He who has learnt these two lessons, the same knows with Paul how to labour and strive; to sustain labour i» the word; afflictions and dangers for the word. These cannot be separated : for he is defective in his vocation who dreads to suffer for the truth. Patience in the . things of God is so inculcated, says Tertullian, in his treatise, De patient. cap. 1, because he who is a stranger to pa- : — tience can obey no precept, can perform no work pleasing to the Lord. For this is the shield of every virtue.—So much concerning the labour: now let us consider the Helper.

According to his working, which worketh in me mightily] i. e. according to the effectual working of Christ. This is that other argument whereby the Apostle enhances his ministry, and shews at the same time his modesty and humility. He had affirmed that he laboured and strove to present every man perfect in Christ Jesus: Now he adds that he did this not relying upon human strength or his own powers, but upon the divine assistance of Christ, strengthened and aided by his might.

Concerning this efficacy, or might of Christ, we shall consider three things: the origin of it; the mode, and the effeet.

1. Every operation flows from some origin: it is proper to inquire, therefore, in the first place, what is the origin of this most effectual working; according to which Paul says that he laboured and strove with so much constancy and fortitude,

We answer, that Christ himself, or the Spirit of Christ, is the efficient principle of this working: For thus Christ himself promised, Luke, ult. 49, Behold I send the promise of my Father upon you; but tarry ye in Jerusalem until ye be endued with power from on high, i. e. until the Holy Spirit descends upon you, who will be the fountain and the principle of all might and spiritual strength in you all. Hence that glorying of the Apostle, Philip. iv. 13, 4 can do all things through Christ who strengtheneth me.

2. We must inquire, how the Holy Spirit effects this sufficiency in Ministers to fulfil the work of their ministry. Not only by the concurrence and aid of his might, but by the communication and influence of his grace. For he creates in the minds of godly Ministers certain new and supernatural qualities, whereby they are rendered adequate to do and suffer all those things which devolve upon Ministers of the Gospel, So Paul expressly declares, ! Cor. xv. 10, By the grace of God I am what I am; and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain: but 1 laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not 1, but the grace of God which was with me. And in 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6, Our sufficiency as of God; who hath made us able ministers of the New Testament, How hath he made them so? By his Spirit as the effective principle; by the grace of the Spirit as the formal principle.

Lastly, we must speak concerning the effects of the Spirit and of his grace strengthening us. Whereas, then, it is required in a Minister that he both do and suffer all those things which are necessary to further the Gospel, we say the effects of this Spirit and grace are of a twofold division. Some are to render the Minister fit for the duties of his calling: of this kind are the illumination of the mind, the sanctification of the will, love and regard for the flock, and many other such endowments, with which the internal working of Christ, operating in his mind, adorned and enriched Paul. Others are to render a Minister firm and ready to endure any thing for the Gospel: of this kind are fortitude, constancy, patience, zeal for the Divine glory, and all those other virtues vith which the soul is upheld and sustained in undergoing afflictions. We are able also to add a third kind of effects, which are to promote the success of the Gospel, and to procure for the Apostles themselves extraordinary authority : namely, the power of working miracles, which some interpreters think to be intended when the Apostle says, according to his working, which worketh in me mightily ; for this they apply to the power of miracles. From all these things, therefore, it appears that Paul both performed and endured all things for the advancement of the Gospel, not in his own strength, but according to the power of Christ working in him.

Hence we infer,

1. That no one should undertake the ministry relying upon his own ability or strength, but suppliantly to seek the aid of Divine grace. For no one is competent by himself for such a duty : but as Cyprian piously remarks, De nativ. Christi, The Spirit infusing himself into the minds of . the humble, enlarges the contractedness of the human intellect, and opens the mental eyes to behold invisible things. Thus also no one is ready and strong in himself to suffer for the Gospel: but as it is given to men to believe the Gospel, so also the ability to suffer for the Gospel is derived from God, Phil. : i. 29.

2. No one should be deterred from the pastoral office on account of those injuries and reproaches which are wont to be heaped upon Ministers: for the Spirit of Christ will be with them strengthening them to endure all things even with joyfulness. Jn the world ye shall have tribulation, but in me ye shall have peace, says Christ, John xvi. 33. There shall be from me an inward consolation to revive you, as long as there shall be an outward tyranny from the world to crush you.

3. They are not strengthened by the Spirit of Christ, but hurried along by that of the devil, who, when pressed by afflictions, do not think upon patience, but seek revenge. And here it will repay our trouble to consider what a difference there is between Paul, Peter, and the rest of the Apostles, and the Roman Pontiffs. The Apostles were armed against the persecutions of tyrants by fortitude from God, constancy of mind, and patience: but the latter proclaim, that they are armed by treachery, sword, and fire. For Bellarmin teaches, that God had not provided all things necessary to his Church unless he had granted power to the Pope of changing kingdoms, deposing kings, and absolving subjects from the oath of allegiance, if it should happen that any king should resist the Church. God, however, is not wanting to the Church, although he granted not to the Pope power of deposing kings, because he has given to the Church the power and the will to suffer for righteousness, and because by these sufferings the religion of Christians is increased; according to that remark of Tertullian, in his Apologet. cap. 50, The more we are cut down by you, the more we increase ; for the blood of Christians is the seed of the Church.

Lastly, it is hence manifest that all the labour of Ministers is lost, as it respects their hearers, unless the powerful working of Christ produce the effects in the minds of the one as well as of the other. Paul may plant, and Apollos may water ; but God giveth the increase, 1 Cor. iii. 6. Jt is necessary that the Holy Spirit should work internally, that the remedy may be effectual which is offered externally : Unless he is present in the hearts of the hearers, the word of the speaker is useless, as Augustine has well said.

We have now completed the first Chapter, in which the foundations of the whole of the Apostolic discussion are laid down, the titles of Christ explained, and the doctrine of our redemption by Him settled and established. In the following Chapter the Apostle encounters those seducers who attempted to withdraw the Colossians from Christ.¹⁷²

EXPOSITION

OF

THE SECOND CHAPTER. OF this whole Chapter a few things may be premised generally ; and then, according to our custom, we shall proceed to a particular elucidation of the text.

In this general dissertation we shall briefly point out three things, viz. the Apostle’s object in this Chapter; the state and sum of the controversy to be discussed ; and the arrangement or distribution of the whole Chapter in its parts. i

As to the design of the Apostle: he aims directly in this whole discussion, to retain the Colossians and all other Christians firm and stedfast in the truth of the Gospel, which places all the ground of our salvation in Christ alone; and to fortify them against the deceptions of all seducers, who would blend with Christ, in the business of salvation, either the doctrine of philosophy, or the Mosaic ceremonies, or even traditions of their own invention. Therefore, as a wise physician, in the preceding Chapter the Apostle had exhibited to them the sustenance of wholesome doctrine ; in this he points out the food to be avoided as noxious and dangerous to the souls’ health. In the former, as a good husbandman, he sowed the good seed in the field of the Colossian Church; in this, as a provident husbandman, he warns them, lest, falling asleep, they should admit for wheat the tares sowed meanwhile by impostors. This, then, is the scope of this Chapter, viz. that the Colossians may be retained and confirmed in the true doctrine, and fortified against novel corruptions.

Now from these remarks it is easy to reduce the sum of the whole controversy to two points. First, that in Christ alone, according to the Gospel doctrine, we have every thing sufficient to salvation. Secondly, whatever traditions, ceremonies, and philosophical speculations are obtruded in the business of salvation, in addition to Christ, are altogether vanity and imposture. These propositions the Apostle so treats through this whole Chapter, that he does not dismiss the one before he proceeds to the other; but indiscriminately and alternately, and often by varied turns, he lays down, proves, and illustrates sometimes the one, and sometimes the other. And it seems to me that the Apostle adopts this method with the design that by frequent discussion and repetition of both, he may fix each of them deeply in the minds of Christians.

Finally, we have to speak of the division of this Chapter into its members; and it seems that the whole may be aptly divided into four parts :

1. The exordium or preface, comprised in the first seven verses.

2. The proposition of the subject to be treated, briefly laid down in the eighth verse.

3. The confirmation of the Apostle’s judgment, extended as far as to the seventeenth verse.

4. The conclusion of the question, amplified and illustrated, to the end, as is common in conclusions.

OF THE EXORDIUM.

Let us now enter upon a view of the Exordium, comprehended (as I have stated) in the seven first verses: and that consists of three parts;

1. Ina narrative proposition, in which he shews both his conduct and his mind towards the Colossians; in the first verse.

2. The statement of his reasons or the occasion; in which he gives many reasons for his procedure, and proposition; from the first verse to tlie sixth.

3. An hortatory conclusion; in which he advises them to obey the truth, nor suffer such great solicitude of an Apostle for their salvation to be in vain; in verses six and seven.‘

From the construction of this Exordium I venture to assert, that there is no rule laid down by Aristotle, Cicero, and other masters of eloquence, concerning the framing of introductions, which is not adhered to in this brief opening. For three things are required by them in a legitimate Exordium: That it be adapted to render the hearer attentive, and docile, and to conciliate his affection. We render our hearers attentive when we shew them that we are about to speak of great and unusual things, or which relate to those who hear. The Apostle excels in all these respects ; for what is either greater or more excellent than the mystery of God, the treasures of Christ? What either to be more wondered at, or more dangerous than the speeches and deceivings of impostors and their arts? Lastly, What more properly concerned the Colossians than that spiritual consolation, and the riches of understanding, which is promised to them at the threshold of this address? These things, therefore, are sufficient as to attention. ]

Now as to what pertains to docility ; Rhetoricians direct that in an Exordium, the sum of the subject to be treated, and the points of proof, should, as it were, be scattered by the way: for it ought to be ddomomais To ‘eziovri Aoyw, a paving of the way for the discourse that is to follow, as Aristotle wisely says in Rhetor. 3. 14. This the Apostle effects in verses 3 and 4. In the former he lays down the ground of his defence; in the latter he confutes the reverse by stigmatizing it with the name of imposture.

Concerning the great art of conciliating their good-will much need not be said ; it abundantly shines forth in every sentence. He conciliates their good-will to himself from his own personal character, by relating what labours he had undertaken for them, and what benevolent feelings he always entertained towards them ; from the personal character of his adversaries, by reciting their impostures and frauds ; and from the personal character of the Colossians themselves, by declaring their order, their stedfastness in the faith, and by importuning them to constancy and progress in these good qualities; and, lastly, from the facts themselves, by teaching that he strives for the treasures of Christ, but his adversaries for dross instead of gold, i. e. for doating schemes and impostures.

Although these technicalities are not immediately in connexion with our undertaking, I was nevertheless desirous to glance at them by the way for two reasons. One was, lest we should despise the sacred Scriptures and their writers as devoid of eloquence and human literature. For that remark of Ambrose, Epist. lib. 8. ep. 63, is true: The writers of the divine books, although they did not write them according to the rules of art, but according to grace, which is superior to art; yet they who have written concerning this art, have discovered the rules of it in their writings. And that also of Augustine, 4 De doctr. Christ. cap. 7, The sacred writings possess, but do not affect eloquence. For God, who hath formed the voice, the mind, and the tongue, however he would have their discourses to be wanting in disguise, was yet unwilling that they should be in any wise deficient in useful and solid art. Vide Rupert, lib. 7, concerning the works of the Holy Spirit, as largely proving this.¹⁷³

The other reason why we have just touched the skilful disposition of the Apostle’s writing was, lest unskilful and unlearned men, when they write or preach whatever comes uppermost, exhibiting no study or art, should flatter themselves, as though they trod in the steps of the Apostles. They, being extraordinarily assisted by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, wanted not the ordinary aid of art; but us, to whom it is not permitted to expect this full power to work miracles, it behoves to seek aid as well in writing as in preaching, by study, by industry, and every suitable means.‘ But quitting these things, let us proceed to the text.

---