|
> Chapter 3 > Chapter 4 > Chapter 5 > Chapter 6 > Chapter 7 > Chapter 8 > Chapter 9 > Chapter 10 > Chapter 11 > Chapter 12 > Chapter 13 > Chapter 14 > Chapter 15 > Chapter 16 >
(1) Therefore you have no excuse, O man, whoever you are, when you judge another; for in passing judgment upon him you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, are doing the very same things. (2)We know that the judgment of God is according to truth against those who do such things. (3) Do you suppose, O man, that when you judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself, you will escape the judgment of God? (4) Or do you despise the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience? Do you not know that God's leads you to penance? (5) But by your hardness and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath and revelation of the just judgment of God. 169. After showing that the Gentiles did not become just from the knowledge of the truth they had, the Apostle now shows that neither were the Jews made just by the things in which they gloried. Consequently, both of them need the power of the gospel’s grace for salvation. First, therefore, he says that the Jews were not made just by the Law; secondly, that they were not made just by the race in which they gloried, in chapter 3 [n. 246] at Then what advantage has the Jew?; 90 thirdly, that they were not made just by circumcision, in chapter 4 [n. 322] at What therefore shall we say? 170. In regard to the first point it should be noted that Jews and Gentiles converted to the faith judged each other on their previous life. For the Jews objected to the Gentiles that when they lived without God’s law, they sacrificed to idols. The Gentiles on their part objected to the Jews that even though they received God’s law, they did not keep it. First, therefore, he rebukes both sides and their extravagant judgment; secondly, he shows that the Jews were not worthy of a reward, because the things they glory in were not sufficient for salvation, there [v. 13; n. 210] at For it is not the hearers of the Law. In regard to the first he does two things. First, he confutes human judgment; secondly, he discloses and commends the divine judgment, there [v. 2; n. 178] at For we know. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he proposes that although they judge one another, neither has an excuse; secondly, he gives the reason, there [v. lb; n. 172] at for in passing judgment. 171. First, therefore, he concludes from what he stated in the first chapter that even though the Gentiles by their wickedness suppressed the truth they knew about God, you have no excuse, 0 man, whoever you are, when you judge another, just as he said earlier: "So they are without excuse" (Rom 1:20). 91 He says, whoever you are, as if to say: Whether Jew or Gentile, because even the Gentiles, who might seem to have an excuse, cannot be excused on the plea of ignorance, as he stated above in 1:20 ff; "Do not pronounce judgment before the time" (1 Cor 4:5). 172. Then when he says For in passing judgment he gives the reason by rejecting the causes for excuse: first, ignorance; secondly, innocence, there [v. 1c; n. 176] at because you, the judge. 173. Ignorance is excluded by the very act of judging. For whoever judges another an evildoer shows that he knows that the conduct is evil and, therefore, that he is himself worthy of condemnation. And this is what he says: You have no excuse, for in passing judgment upon him as an evildoer you condemn yourself, i.e., you show that you are worthy of being condemned: "Judge not, that you may not be judged" (Mt 7:1). 174. This does not mean that every judgment is a cause of condemnation. For there are three kinds of judgment: one is just, i.e., made according to the rule of justice: "Love justice, you rulers of the earth" (Wis 1:1); another is not just, i.e., made contrary to the rule of justice: "Although servants of his kingdom, you did not rule rightly" (Wis 6:4); the third is rash judgment against which Ec (5:2) says: "Be not rash with your mouth." A rash judgment is made in two ways: in one way, when a person passes judgment on a matter committed to him without due knowledge of the truth, contrary to what is stated in Jb (29:16): "I searched out the cause of him whom I did not know." In another way, when a person presumes to judge about hidden matters, of which God alone has the power to judge, contrary to what is stated in 1 Cor (4:5): "Do not pronounce 92 judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness." 175. But some things are hidden not only in relation to us but of their very nature and so belong solely to God’s knowledge: first, the thoughts of the heart: "Man’s heart is deceitful and unsearchable. Who can understand it? I, the Lord, search the mind and try the heart" (Jer 17:9); secondly, the contingent future: "Tell us what is to come hereafter that we may know you are gods" (Is 41:23). Hence, as Augustine says: "There are two cases in which we must beware of rash judgment: when it is not certain in what spirit something was done, or when it is not certain how a person will turn out, who now appears to be good or to be wicked." The first judgment is not a cause for condemnation, but the second and third are. 176. Then when he says for you, the judge, he rejects the other excuse, namely, innocence. As if to say: The reason why you, the judge of others, condemn yourself is that you are doing the very same things for which you condemn them; consequently, it seems that you are acting against your conscience: "Why do you see the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye?" (Mt 7:3). 177. However, it should be noted that it is not always true, when someone judges another concerning a sin which he himself commits, that he automatically draws a condemnation upon himself, because he does not always sin mortally by so judging; yet he always reveals his own damnation. For if he is publicly guilty of the sin concerning which he judges another, he seems to be giving scandal by judging, unless perhaps he humbly reproves himself along with the other and laments his sin. 93 But if he is secretly guilty of the same sin, he does not sin by judging another about the same sin, especially when he does so with humility and with an effort to rise again, as Augustine says in The Lord’s Sermon on the Mount: "When necessity compels us to correct someone, let us first examine whether it is a vice, such as we never had: and then let us reflect that we could have bad it or that we once had it and no longer have it: and then our common weakness will prod the memory, so that mercy and not hatred will guide that correction. But if we discover that we are presently guilty of the same vice, we should not scold but lament together and invite the other to join you in grieving." 178. Then when he says For we know (v. 2), he discloses and commends God’s judgment. And concerning this he does three things. First, he declares the truth of God’s judgment; secondly, he rejects a contrary opinion, there [v. 3; n. 180] at Do you suppose; thirdly, he manifests the truth, there [v. 6; n. 189] at Who will render. 179. First, therefore, he says: The reason I say that you condemn yourself, when you do the same things that you judge, is that we know, i.e., we hold it as certain, that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who do such things i.e. God’s judgment threatens them: "The avenger of sin is the sword, that you may know there is a judgment" (Jb 19:29); "God will bring every deed into judgment" (Ec 12:14). We also know that this judgment will be based on the truth: "He will judge the earth with righteousness" (Ps 96:13). But man’s judgment, even though it be formed justly, is not always based on the truth of the affair, but on the words of witnesses, which sometimes clash with the truth. But this cannot happen in the divine judgment, because, as is said in Jer (21:23): "I am 94 the judge and witness." Nor is He deceived by false allegations: "I will not spare him, nor his mighty words, and framed to make supplication" (Jb 41:12). 180. Then when he says Do you suppose (v. 3) he rejects a contrary opinion. First, he states it; secondly, the cause of it, there [v. 4a; n. 182] at Or do you despise; thirdly, he disproves it, there [v. 4b; n. 183] at Do you not know. 181. First, therefore, he says: I have said that God’s judgment is in accordance with the truth, against those who do such things. But do you not, O man, whoever you are, who judges those who do such things and yet do them yourself, do you not fear a higher judgment? Do you suppose that you will escape the judgment of God? As if to say: If you suppose this, you are wrong: "Whither shall I go from thy Spirit? or whither shall I flee from your presence? (Ps 139:7); "All way of escape will be lost to them" (Jb 11:20). 182. Then when he says, Or do you presume, he shows the cause of this false supposition. For since man is not punished at once by God for sin, he supposes that he will not be punished, which is contrary to Si (4:5): "Do not say, ‘I sinned, and what happened to me? For the Lord is slow to anger"; "because sentence against an evil deed is not executed speedily, the heart of the sons of men is fully set to do evil" (Ec 8:11) Yet the fact that the sinner does evil a hundred times and is patiently endured should not lead him to presume on God, but to conclude that it is good to fear Him. Therefore, he says here, do you presume upon: "When wickedness comes, contempt comes also" (Pr 18:3); the riches, i.e., the abundance: "God who is rich in mercy" (Eph 2:3); of his kindness, through which He diffuses His blessings on us: Thou openest thy 95 hand and satisfiest the desire of every living thing" (Psl45:l6). For according to Denis the good involves the notion of diffusing itself: "The Lord is good to those who wait on him." (Lam 3:25); and longsuffering, through which Be endures for a long time those who sin from weakness and continue in their sin for a long time: "And count the forbearance of our Lord as salvation" (2 Pt 3:15); and patience, through which He endures those who sin grievously and from malice: "God is a righteous and patient judge. Is he indignant every day?" (Ps 7:11). 183. Then when he says Do you not know (v.4b) he disproves the aforementioned cause, namely the cause of contempt of the divine patience. First, he discloses the purpose of God’s patience; secondly, the danger of contempt, there [v. 5; n. 186] at But by your hardness. 184. First, therefore, he says it is hard to understand your scorn; do you not know that God’s kindness in postponing punishment is meant to lead you to repentance? "The Lord is not slow about his promise as some count slowness, but forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance" (2 Pt 3:9); "The Lord waits to be gracious to you" (Is 30:l8). 185. As is said in the gloss [of Lombard], the Apostle seems to touch upon three groups of sinners: those who promise themselves impunity; those who scorn God’s goodness; and the ignorant. Hence, the Gloss says: "You sin, O man, as long as you promise yourself that you will escape punishment; you sin more gravely, because you scorn; you sin most gravely, because you are ignorant. 96 But this seems to be false, for ignorance makes a sin less serious, rather than more serious. The answer, as is held by some, is that it is more serious, i.e., more dangerous for some, because those who are ignorant of sin do not seek a remedy. Or it is most serious, if it is the form of ignorance that pertains to unbelief, which is the gravest sin: "If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized" (1 Cor 14:38). Or it is most serious in ingratitude, as Augustine says: "One who does not recognize a blessing is more ungrateful than one who belittles, i.e., scorns it." 186. Then when he says But by your hardness (v. 5) he shows the danger of contempt, because it is not softened by the blessings of God’s goodness: "A hard heart will be afflicted at the end" (Si 4:26); and impenitent heart, which is not moved to repent by God’s forbearance and patience: "No man repents of his wickedness" (Is 8:6), you are storing up wrath for yourself, i.e., you are multiplying the debt of punishment: "You have laid up a treasure of wrath for the last days" (Jas 5:3). Hence there follows on the day of wrath, i.e., on the day of judgment: "A day of wrath is that day" (Zeph 1:15), namely, because God does not now inflict the punishment He will inflict then, as is stated in Ps 75 (v.2): "At the set time I will judge with equity"; when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed, because the justice of God’s judgment will be revealed then, whereas now it is not believed or does not seem just: "Soon my salvation will come and my justice revealed" (Is 56:1). 187. Because the gloss [of Lombard, col. 1340] says that by hardness and impenitent heart is meant a sin against the Holy Spirit, which is unforgivable, it is important to see what a sin against the Holy Spirit is and why it is unforgivable. 97 Accordingly, it should be noted that in the opinion of the earlier Fathers of the Church who preceded Augustine, namely, Athanasius, Hilary, Ambrose, Jerome and Chrysostom, the sin against the Holy Spirit was the blasphemy whereby the works of the Holy Spirit are attributed to an unclean spirit, as in Matthew (12:31). It is considered unforgivable both in this life and in the future, because the Jews were punished for this sin even in this life by the Romans and in the life to come by devils; or because it has no basis for being excused, unlike the blasphemy they spoke against Christ, inasmuch as He was a son of man: "Behold a glutton and a drunkard" (Mt 11:19). They could have been led to say this on account of the weakness of the flesh, as occurred even in the Old Testament, when the children of Israel complained about the lack of bread and water, as we read in Ex (16:2 ff). This could be considered a human failing and easy to forgive. But later on when they declared before an idol: "These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt" (Ex 32:4), they sinned against the Holy Spirit, for they attributed God’s work to demons. Hence their sin is called unforgivable, when the Lord answers: "Nevertheless, in the day when I visit, I will visit their sin upon them" (Ex 32:34). Augustine, on the other hand, calls a sin against the Holy Spirit any word or blasphemy a person speaks against the Holy Spirit, through Whom sins are forgiven, as is stated in Jn (20:22): "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven." Indeed, this sin is committed in the heart, in word and in deed, as long as one continues in sin to the end. Consequently, final impenitence is a sin against the Spirit and of its very nature unforgivable. 98 Later teachers call a sin against the Holy Spirit one that is committed with deliberate malice, which is opposed to the goodness appropriated to the Holy Spirit, just as a sin against the Son of God is one committed from ignorance, which is opposed to the wisdom appropriated to the Son. Similarly, a sin against the Father is one committed through weakness, which is opposed to the power appropriated to the Father. Consequently, a sin against the Father and against the Son is deemed forgivable, because the very fact that it is committed from ignorance or from weakness seems to be a ground for excuse. But one committed from deliberate malice has no ground for excuse; hence, it is deemed unforgivable, because it has nothing in it to plead forgiveness; although God does forgive it sometimes, because He is good, just as He sometimes used His power to cure a naturally incurable disease. 188. In light of the foregoing, six kinds of sin against the Holy Spirit are listed, each excluding something by which sin is forgiven. The first two are taken on the part of God, namely, hope in His mercy, to which is opposed despair, and fear of God’s justice, to which is opposed presumption. Two others are taken on the part of man, namely, contempt for the changeable good, to which is opposed obstinacy, which is here called hardness, through which a person hardens his soul to sin; and abandonment of the state of being turned away from God, to which is opposed an impenitent heart, which never intends to repent and return to God. The last two are taken on the part of God’s gifts, one of which is faith "by faith sins are cleansed," to which is opposed resistance to the acknowledged truth. The other is 99 charity: "Charity covers all offenses" (Pr 10:12), to which is opposed envy of a brother’s grace.
189. After suggesting that God’s judgment is true and refuting the contrary opinion [n. 178], the Apostle here unfolds the truth of God’s judgment. First, he presents his intention; secondly, he manifests it, there [v. 7; n. 195] at To those who by patience. 190. First, he states facts about God’s judgment in regard to two things, namely, persons and their works. 100 In regard to works, God does not repay in the present life according to one’s works, for sometimes He gives grace to evil-doers, as to the apostle Paul, who obtained mercy after being a blasphemer and persecutor. But this will not be so on the day of judgment, when the time comes to judge according to justice: "At the set time which I appoint, I will judge with equity" (Ps 75:2); hence, another passage says: "Requite them according to their works" (Ps 28:4). With regard to persons, equality of retribution will be observed toward all: "We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ" (2 Cor 5:10). 191. However, it seems that retribution will not be made according to one’s works, because an eternal punishment will be paid for a temporal sin. The answer, as Augustine says in the City of God, is that in justice’s repayment equality in time between sin and punishment is not a consideration, because even in human judgment for a sin of adultery committed in a short time the death penalty is inflicted. Here the legislator is not interested in the time it takes to punish, but rather that the adulterer’s death will forever separate him from the society of the living. Thus, in his way man, too, punishes a temporal sin with an eternal punishment. Consequently, it is not strange if sins committed against charity, through which is formed a society between God and men, are punished eternally by the divine judgment. 192. The justice of this is clear on three counts. First, on account of the infinite dignity of God Who is sinned against. For a sin is graver, the greater the dignity of the person sinned against, just as it is a greater crime to strike a prince than to strike a private citizen. Consequently, since the guilt of mortal sin 101 is in a sense infinite, an infinite punishment should balance it. Therefore, since it cannot be infinite in intensity, it must be infinite in duration. 193. Secondly, on account of the will of the sinner. For whoever sins mortally turns from the unchangeable good and fixes his end in a changeab1e good, as a fornicator in a pleasure of the flesh and a covetous person in money. And because the end is sought for itself, whoever seeks the end is borne toward it and wills to possess it always, if something else does not hinder. Hence, one who sins mortally has the will to remain in sin forever, unless something changes him accidentally, as when he fears punishment. Consequently, it is fitting that if a man through his will seeks sin to be enjoyed forever, he should be punished for it eternally. For God, Who sees the heart, directs His special attention to the will of the sinner. 194. Thirdly, on account of the effect of sin, namely, the withdrawal of grace, from which it follows that a man left to himself would remain forever in sin, from which he cannot be extricated except by the help of grace. But it is not fitting that, the sin remaining, the penalty should cease; consequently, the penalty lasts forever. The statement, to render to every man according to his works, does not mean according to equality of works because the reward exceeds the merit, but according to proportion, because He will render good to the good and better to the better. The same applies to evil. 195. Then when he says to those who by patience (v. 7) he clarifies his statement: first, in regard to works; secondly, in regard to persons, there [v. 9b; n. 201] at on every soul. In regard to works he shows the truth of God’s judgment: 102 first, to the good; secondly, to the wicked, there [v. 8; n. 198] at but for those who are factious. 196. In regard to the first there are two things to consider, namely, merit and reward [n. 197]. Three things combine or merit: first, patience, which can mean God’s patience as referred above: "Do you presume upon the riches of his goodness and patience?" (v.4). Then those who by patience in well-doing would be those who make good use of God’s patience by doing good. Or it can mean man’s patience, and this in two ways: in one way, so that patience implies tolerating adversity with equanimity of heart. For it is necessary that one not give up good works on account of the evils he suffers, and this is what he says: by patience in well-doing. "Patience has a perfect work" (Jas 1:4); "By your patience you will gain your lives" (Lk 21:19). In another way, patience can be taken for long-suffering or for perseverance, which keeps a person from abandoning a good work on account of tedium: "You also be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand" (Jas 5:8); "you have need of patience" (Heb 10:36). The second feature of merit is the goodness of a work, which is good, if it is directed to its proper end and if it conforms to its proper rule, which is God’s law and human reason: "Let us not grow weary in well-doing" (Gal 6:9). The third feature is a right intention, i.e., to seek eternal life, so that in the evils a man suffers or in the good he does he is not seeking something temporal, but eternal: "Seek first the kingdom of God" (Mt 6:33). 103 197. In regard to the reward he touches on three things: the first is glory, which signifies the splendor of the saints: either intrinsic glory, with which the mind will be filled: "The Lord will fill your soul with brightness" (Is 58:11), or external glory, with which their body will shine: "The righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their father" (Mt 13:43); "Let the faithful exult in glory" (Ps 149:5). The second is honor, through which is signified the dignity of the saints and the reverence paid to them by every creature. For they will be kings and priests: "Thou hast made them a kingdom and priests to our God" (Rev 5:10) and will be numbered among the sons of God: "Why has he been numbered among the sons of God?" (Wis 5:5); "Thy friends are made exceedingly honorable, O God" (Ps 139:17). The third is immortality, because that glory and honor will not pass, as they do in this world: "They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable" (1 Cor 9:25). 198. Then when he says, but for those who are factious, he shows the truth of a God’s judgment on the wicked and touches on sin and punishment. In regard to sin three things are mentioned. The first is the obstinacy of the factious, which can be understood of man toward God calling him to Himself by His blessings, against which a man seems to struggle by resisting them: "Behold, while I am yet alive with you, you have always been rebellious against the Lord" (Dt 31:27). Secondly, it is understood of man’s struggle against faith: "Avoid disputing with words" (2 Ti 2:14). Thirdly, it can be understood of men struggling with one another, which is contrary to charity, the mother of the virtues: "Where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice" (Jas 3:16). 104 The second is the hardness of those who do not obey the truth. This can be understood in one way of the truth of faith: "If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?" (Jn 9:46); in another way, of the truth of God’s justice, to which they do not acquiesce, not believing the truth of His justice: "You say: ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’" (Ez 18:29). In a third way, it can be understood of the truth of life, in which they do not acquiesce who live perversely: "He who does what is true comes to the light" (Jn 3:21). The third is malice; hence, he says: but obey [believe] wickedness, either because they consent to those who urge wickedness: "An evil-doer listens to wicked lips" (Pr 17:4); or because they believe that sins will not be punished, which would make God wicked: "Do not say: ‘I have sinned and what happened to me’?" (Si 5:4); or they believe wickedness, i.e., unbelief, namely, teachings against the faith: "So that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness" (2 Th 2:12). 199. In regard to punishment four things are mentioned, which can be distinguished in two ways. In one way, so that wrath, i.e., punishment and corporal vengeance is understood to come after the judgment: "A day of wrath is that day" (Zeph l:15); fury during the judgment, when the wicked will be angry at themselves for the sins they committed: "It was we who strayed from the way of truth" (Wis 5:6). Tribulation and distress pertain to the soul separated from the body before the resurrection: "When distress and anguish come upon you" (Pr 1:27). 105 200. Or they can be distinguished in another way, so that the first two are taken on the part of God, Whose wrath is His disposition to punish, which is horrible for the wicked: "They will call to the mountains and rocks, "Fall on us and hide us from the force [?] of the one sitting on the throne and from the fury of the Lamb" (Rev 6:16). His fury refers to the fact that He will consider sinners unworthy of eternal life: "I swore in my anger that they should not enter into my rest" (Ps 95:11). But the other two are taken on the part of man. The word, tribulation, comes from tribulus, a prickly plant; hence, anything that causes pain can pertain to tribulation: "The sound of the day of the Lord is bitter; the mighty man meets tribulation there" (Zeph 1:14). But distress is so called from the fact that a man’s spirit is in anguish, being unable to find a remedy against the evils he fears or already suffers: "I am hemmed in on every side and know not what to choose" (Sus 1:22); "Will God hear his cry when trouble comes upon him?" (Jb 27:9). 201. Then when he says on every soul (9b) he shows the truth of God’s judgment in regard to persons. First, he proposes its equity; secondly, he assigns the reason for this, there [v. 11; n. 205] at For there is no respect of persons; thirdly, he explains the reason, there [v. 12; n. 207] All who have sinned. 202. The truth of the divine judgment in regard to persons is shown, first, as it affects the wicked, when he says, for every human being who does evil, i.e., against every soul, because just as the glory of the saints passes from the soul to the body, so the punishment of the wicked is first and chiefly in the soul and secondly in the body which, 106 on account of defect or sin, will rise capable of suffering: "The soul that sins shall die" (Ez 18:4). 203. But he says, the Jew first and also the Greek, because a greater punishment was due the Jews as knowing God’s will through the Law: "That servant who knew his master’s will but did not make ready or act according to his will shall receive a severe beating" (Lk 12:47). Similarly, Christians are punished more severely than unbelievers for the same sin, e.g., adultery or theft: "How much worse punishment do you think will be deserved by the man who has spurned the son of God and profaned the blood of the covenant in which he was sanctified?" (Heb 10:29). But as to total punishment, that of unbelievers is more severe on account of the sin of unbelief, which is the gravest. Hence, it says in 2 Pt (2:2) that "God’s wrath rests upon unbelievers." 204. Secondly, he shows this in regard to the good: first, he repeats the two things mentioned above, namely, glory and honor, but the third, namely, peace, he mentions instead of immortality, which includes peace among many other things. For a man’s peace cannot be complete as long as he fears he might lose the good things he has; rather, one has true peace of heart when he has everything he desires and no fear of losing then: "My people will abide in a peaceful habitation" (Is 32:18). In these things, too, he gives primacy to the Jews, because they were first promised to them, and the Gentiles entered into their promises: "Others have labored and you have entered into their labors" (Jn 4:38). 107 205. Then when he says, God shows no partiality, he assigns the reason for his statement, namely, because there is no respect of persons with God: "Truly I perceive that God shows no partiality" (Ac 10:34). Respect of persons is opposed to distributive justice, through which one distributes to each according to the person’s worth; therefore, there is respect of persons, when more is given or less is given without regard to worth. This happens when the person rather than his qualifications is accepted as a cause. In this case there is a cause, i.e., a rule of action, but the person is taken as the cause of doing something. Thus, if one gives more inheritance to another on account of a blood relationship, it is not respect of persons, because this relationship is a fitting cause why he should receive such benefits. But if a prelate gives more ecclesiastical goods to someone on account of a blood relationship, it would be respect of persons, if some other qualification were not present. For blood relationship is not a suitable reason for receiving spiritual goods. Therefore, because God does everything for the best of reasons, respect of persons does not enter into His actions: "Wisdom orders all things well" (Wis 8:l). 206. Yet He seems to be a respecter of persons, because He abandons some sinners and calls others to Himself. The answer is that respect of persons is opposed to justice; hence, it finds its sphere in the payment of debts, with which justice is concerned. But God calls sinners to repentance not from debt but as a favor: "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works" (Rom 11:6); "Not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy he saved us" (*** 3:5). 108 In such gifts not only God, but man too, is free to give to whom he will: "Am I not allowed to give what I choose with what belongs to me?" (Mt 20:15). 207. Then when he says All who have sinned (v.12) he explains the reason. For if all who sinned are punished, it is clear that there is no respect of persons with God. Hence, he speaks first of those who have not received the Law, saying that all who have sinned without the Law received from God by Moses, will perish without the law, i.e., will be condemned, but not for transgression of the Law: "Because no one understands, they will perish forever" (Job 4:20 Vul.). Secondly, he speaks of those who received the written law, and he says that all who have sinned under the Law, i.e. after the written Law, will be judged by the Law, i.e., precisely for having transgressed a precept of the Law: "The word which I have spoken will be his judge on the last day" (Jn 12:48). 208. The Apostle’s manner of speaking here has been taken as an occasion of error by some. Because the Apostle does not say that all who sinned under the Law will perish by the Law, as he had said of those who are without the Law that they will perish without the law, some believed that those who sin after receiving the law will be judged by some means, i.e., in the present, but will not perish. But as the Gloss [of Lombard, col. 1344] says: "What Christian would say that the Jew will not perish for not believing in Christ, when the Lord says that it will be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for them" (Mt 10:15). Hence Ez (18:32) says: "I have no pleasure in the death of the sinner." 109 209. But the Apostle uses these different expressions because, as Gregory says on Jb (36:6): "He gives judgment to the poor," some will perish in the future judgment without being judged, i.e., the wicked who are without faith and the Law: "The wicked will not stand in the judgment" (Ps 1:5), namely, because there is no basis for discussion with one entirely estranged from God: "He who does not believe is condemned" (Jn 3:18). But others who sin in spite of having received the Law and faith will perish in such a way as also to be judged through a discussion held with them; hence, Ez (34:17): "I judge between sheep and sheep, rams and he-goats," just as a king condemns enemies without a hearing, but citizens with a careful examination, as Gregory says. 210. After confuting the human judgment with which the Gentiles and Jews judged one another and commending God’s judgment [n. 169], the Apostle now undertakes to show that the things in which the Jews gloried do not suffice for their salvation. First, he states his position; secondly, he answers arguments against his position, in chapter 3, there [n. 246] at Then what advantage has the Jew? The Jews gloried in two things, namely, the Law and circumcision, which stemmed not from the Law but from the patriarchs, as stated in John 7(:22). First, therefore, he shows that the Jewish Law heard or accepted was not enough for salvation; secondly, he shows the same about circumcision, there [v. 25; n. 237] at Circumcision indeed. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he sets forth his position; secondly, he clarifies it, there [v. 14; n. 213] at For when Gentiles. 211. In regard to the first he sets forth two things: one by rejecting; the other by asserting. For he rejects the Jewish opinion that they were made righteous by merely hearing the Law. Hence he says: I have said that all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law, for it is not the hearers of the law, i.e., in virtue of having heard the Law, who are righteous before God, even if they are deemed righteous before men: "Every one who hears these words of mine and does not do them is like a foolish man" 111 (Mt 7:26); "If anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who observes his natural face in a mirror..." (Jas 1:23). Secondly, he declares that the doers of the Law are righteous, when he says, but the doers of the law will be justified: "Everyone who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man" (Mt 7:24); "Be doers of the word and not hearers only" (Jas 1:22); "A good understanding have all those who practice it" (Ps 111:10). 212. But this point seems to conflict with his own statement below (3:20) that "no human being will be justified in his sight by the works of the law." Consequently, no one is justified precisely for doing the works of the Law. The answer is that justification can be taken in three ways: in one way, in regard to reputation; then one is said to be justified, when he is regarded as just: "You have made your sisters appear justified," i.e., by reputation (Ez 16:51). In this sense, the doers of the law are justified, i.e., are considered just before God and men. Secondly, by doing what is just: "This man went down to his home justified" (Lk 18:14), because the publican performed a work of justice by confessing his sin. In this way is verified the statement that the doers of the law will be justified, i.e., by performing the justices of the Law. In a third way justification can be considered in regard to the cause of justice, so that a person is said to be justified, when he newly receives justice, as in (5:1): "Since we are justified by faith, we are at peace with God." It must not be supposed, however, that the doers of the Law are justified as though acquiring justice through the works of the Law. This cannot be accomplished either by the ceremonial works, which confer no 112 justifying grace, or by the moral works, from which the habit of justice is not acquired; rather, we do such works in virtue of an infused habit of justice. 213. Then when he says For when Gentiles who (v.14) he clarifies his position. First, he shows that doers of the Law are justified even without being hearers; secondly, that hearers of the Law are not justified without observing the Law, there [v. 17; n. 224] at But if you are called a Jew. In regard to the first he does three things: first, he mentions the worthiness of those who observe the Law without having heard it; secondly, he clarifies what he had said, there [v. 15; n. 218] at They show that what the law requires; thirdly, he proves it, there [v. 15b; n. 219] at while their conscience also bears witness. 214. In regard to the first he touches on three things relating to the Gentiles [nn. 215, 217]. First, their lack of the Law, saying, when Gentiles who do not have the law, namely, the divine, which they have not received. For the Law was not delivered to the Gentiles but to the Jews: "The law which Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the congregations of Jacob" (Si 24:24); "He has not dealt thus with any other nation" (Ps 147:20); "When Moses commanded us a law, as a possession for the assembly of Jacob" (Dt 33:4). From this it is clear that the Gentiles did not sin by not observing the ceremonies of the Law. 113 215. Secondly, he commends their observance of law, when he says, they do by nature what the law requires, i.e., the moral precepts, which flow from a dictate of natural reason. Thus Job (1:1) was blameless and upright, fearing God and turning away from evil. Hence he himself says: "My foot has held fast to his steps; I have kept his ways" (Jb 23:11). 216. But the expression, by nature, causes some difficulty. For it seems to favor the Pelagians, who taught that man could observe all the precepts of the Law by his own natural powers. Hence, by nature should mean nature reformed by grace. For he is speaking of Gentiles converted to the faith, who began to obey the moral precepts of the Law by the help of Christ’s grace. Or by nature can mean by the natural law showing them what should be done, as in Ps 4 (v.6): "There are many who say, ‘Who shows us good things!’ The light of thy countenance, O Lord, is signed upon us," i.e., the light of natural reason, in which is God’s image. All this does not rule out the need of grace to move the affections any more than the knowledge of sin through the Law (Rom 3:20) exempts from the need of grace to move the affections. 217. Thirdly, he shows their worth in that they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law, inasmuch as they function as a law to themselves by instructing and inducing themselves to the good, because the Philosopher says: Law is a statement laying down an obligation and proceeding from prudence and understanding (Eth. 11). Therefore, it says in 1 Tim (l:9) that "the law is not laid down for the just," who is not compelled by a law outside of him, "but for the lawless," who need to be compelled from without. 114 It is, of course, the highest level of greatness among men, when they are induced toward the good not by others but by themselves. The second level belongs to those who are induced by others but without force. The third belongs to those who need to be forced to do good. The fourth belongs to those who cannot be directed to the good even by force: "In vain have I smitten your children; they took no correction" (Jer 2:30). 218. Then when he says They show (v. 15) he explains how they are a law to themselves. This can be likened to a law presented to man from without and which it is customary to deliver in writing on account of the memory’s weakness; whereas, those who observe the law without externally hearing the law show that what the law requires is written "not with ink, but" first and chiefly "with the Spirit of the living God" (2 Cor 3:3), and secondly through study: "Write them on the tablet of your heart" (Pr 3:3), i.e., the precepts of wisdom. Hence, here, too, he continues, on their hearts, not on parchment or on stone or copper tablets: "I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts" (Jer 31:33). 219. Then when he says their conscience also bearing witness (v.15) he proves his statement that the work of the Law is written in their hearts by citing actions which announce its presence. First [cf. n. 222], he mentions those actions, one of which is the witness of conscience. He touches on this when he says, while their conscience also bears witness, conscience being the application of one’s knowledge in judging whether some action was good or bad to do. 115 Hence, this conscience sometimes gives testimony of good: "Our boast is this, the testimony of our conscience" (2 Cor 1:12); and sometimes of evil: "Your conscience knows that many times you have yourself cursed others" (Ec 7:23). However, no one can testify that an action is good or bad, unless he has knowledge of the Law. Hence, if conscience bears witness about good or evil, this is a clear sign that the work of the Law has been written in the man’s heart. 220. Another function is to accuse and defend. Here, too, knowledge of the Law is required. In regard to this he says, and their conflicting thoughts accuse [accusantium] or perhaps excuse [defendentium], i.e., accusantibus or defendentibus, following the Greek practice whereby a genitive is used in place of an ablative. And these are conflicting. For an accusing thought in regard to some action arises in a man, when he has reason to suppose that he has acted evilly: "Mow I rebuke you and lay the charge before you" (Ps 50:21); "The show of their countenance witnesses against them" (Is 3:9). But sometimes a defending thought arises, when he has reason to suppose that he has acted well: "My heart does not reproach me for any of my days" (Jb 27:6). Between this accusation and defense the testimony of conscience has the final say. 221. This passage, their conscience bears witness, can be interpreted in another way, so that there is consciousness not only of one’s deeds but also of thoughts; but the first is better. 222. But because testimony, accusation, and defense occur during a trial, he mentions the time, when he says, on that day. He says this not to designate the quality of 116 the time but the disclosure of things hidden: "I will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness" (1 Cor 4:5). Yet it is sometimes called night on account of the uncertainty of that hour: "At midnight there was a cry" (Mt 25:6). The accusing or defending thoughts are not those which will arise on the day of judgment, because on that day each one’s salvation or damnation will be clear to him; rather, such thoughts as exist now and the testimony of conscience that exists now will be represented to a man on that day by divine power, as Augustine says in book 2 of The City of God. Indeed, the recognition of those thoughts that remain in the soul seems to be nothing lees, as a Gloss says, than the debt of punishment or the reward, which follow them. 223. Then he shows the author of the judgment, when he says, when God judges: "He will judge the world with righteousness" (Ps 96:13). He also describes what the judgment will concern, when he says, the secrets of men, matters about which men cannot now judges. "He will bring to light the thing now hidden in darkness" (1 Cor 4:5). He also shows the teaching from which faith in this judgment is had when he says, according to my gospel, i.e., preaching by me: "On the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word" (Mt 12:36). He says, according to my gospel, although he could not say, "my baptism," and be a minister of both, because in baptism a man’s diligence effects nothing, but in preaching 117 the Gospel the preacher’s industry achieves something: "When you read this you can perceive my insight in the mystery of Christ" (Eph 3:4) Then he mentions the judge, when he says, by Christ Jesus, Who has been appointed by God to be "judge of the living and the dead" (Ac 10:42); "The Father has given all judgment to the Son" (Jn 5:20), Who will appear to the good and the wicked during the judgment: to the good in the glory of the godhead: "Your eyes will see the king in his beauty" (Is 33:17), but to the wicked in His human form: "Every eye will see him" (Rev 1:7). 224. After showing that the doers of the Law are justified even without being hearers, which pertained to the Gentiles, the Apostle now shows that hearers are not justified, unless they are doers, which pertains to the Jews. First, therefore, he shows the Jews’ privileged state in receiving the Law; secondly, their shortcomings in transgressing the Law, there [v. 21; n. 232] at You then who teach others. He shows their privileged state on three counts: first, in being the race to whom the Law was given; secondly, as regards the Law itself, there [v. 17b; n. 226] at and rely upon the law; 119 thirdly, as regards the effect or work of the Law, there [v. 18; n. 227] at and know his will. 225. In regard to race he says, But if you call yourself a Jew, which is an honorable name: "Judah became his sanctuary" (Ps 114:2); "Salvation is from the Jews" (Jn14:22). They are called Jews not after Judas Maccabeus as some say, probably on the ground that he united and protected that people, when they were scattered: "He gladly fought for Israel" (1 Macc 3:2); for the name, "Jews," was in use before his time, as in Est (8:l6): "The Jews had light and gladness..." Rather, it seems that the Jews were named after the patriarch Judah: "Judah, your brothers shall praise you" (Gen 49:8); for in the time of Roboam, when ten tribes seceded from his kingdom and adored a golden calf, they were led away captive by the Assyrians (1 Sam l7). Scripture makes no mention of their return; rather, the land remained occupied by strangers later called Samaritans. But two tribes, Judah and Benjamin, remained in the kingdom of Roboam and persevered in the word of God. Although they were led away captive to Babylon, they were permitted to return to their native land by Cyrus, the Persian king (1 Ezra 1). Then, because the tribe of Judah was the greater, the entire group was named after him: not only those from the tribe of Benjamin but those from the other tribes who joined them. 226. Then when he says and rest on the law (17b) he mentions their prerogative in regard to the Law. First, in regard to the Law itself, when he says, and rest on the law, as certifying what they believed and did. For an intellect in doubt is not at rest but is solicited by both 120 sides; but once it has the certainty of wisdom it rests: "When I enter my house, I shall find rest with her" (Wis 8:16). Secondly, in regard to the lawgiver, when he adds, and boast of your relation to God, i.e., in their worship and knowledge of one God: "Let him who glories glory in this, that he understands and knows me" (Jer 9:24); "Let him who boasts boast in the Lord" (1 Cor 1:31). 227. Then when he adds and know his will (v. 18) he mentions their prerogative in regard to the fruit of the Law: first, with respect to the person himself; secondly, with respect to others, there [v. 19; n. 229] at and if you are sure. 228. In regard to the first he mentions two fruits. The first corresponds to boasting of their relation to God, when he says, and know his will, i.e., what God wants us to do: "That you may prove what is the will of God" (Rom 12:2). The second corresponds to their resting in the law, when he says, and approve what is excellent, i.e., able to select not only good from bad things but better from less good. Hence someone asked: "Which is the great commandment?" (Mt 22:36). And this, because you are instructed in the law: "Happy the man whom you teach your law and teach him about your law" (Ps 94:12) 229. Then he mentions its fruit with respect to others who find themselves in three different situations, so far as knowledge of the Law is concerned [n. 230ff]. For some are entirely ignorant of the Law, because they lack natural talent, just as a man is physically blind, because he lacks visual power: "We grope for the wall like the 121 blind" (Is 59:10). To such persons cannot be given the light of knowledge enabling them to see by themselves what to do; rather, they must be led, as the blind are, by commanding them to do this or that, even though they do not understand the reason for the command: "I became an eye to the blind" (Jb 29:15); "They are blind and leaders of the blind" (Mt 15:14). Others are ignorant through lack of training, being as it were in the exterior darkness and not enlightened by teaching. To such persons a wise man can offer the light of training, so that they will understand what is commanded. This is why he says, a light to those who are in darkness: "To give light to those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death" (Lk 1:79). 230. Secondly, he touches on those who are on the way to knowledge they have not yet attained either through lack of full instruction; hence he says, a corrector of the foolish, i.e., of those who have not yet received wisdom who are said to be instructed, i.e., free from ignorance which is present in everyone from the beginning when they are first instructed: "Do you have children? Discipline them" (Si 7:23). In another way, through lack of age, as children. Hence he says, a teacher of children: "Where is the teacher of little ones?" (Is 33:18). 231. A third group are already advanced in knowledge, but they need instruction from the wise in order to possess the authoritative sayings of wisdom as their rule or pattern. In regard to this he says, having in the law the embodiment [pattern] of knowledge: "Follow the pattern of the sound words which you have heard from me" (2 Tim 1:13); "Mark those who so live as you have an example in us" (Phil 3:17). 122 However, people so patterned must be instructed by the authority of their forbears, if they are to know what has been handed down in the Law. Therefore, he says, of knowledge: "Wisdom gave him knowledge of holy things" (Wis 10:10). This is also necessary if they are to know the true understanding of what has been handed down. That is why he says, and truth: "Send out thy light and thy truth" (Ps 43:3). 232. Then when he says you then who teach others (v.21) he indicates some of their failings. First, failings toward themselves, when he says, You then who teach others by directing them to the good, will you not teach yourself? This can be taken as a question asked with an overtone of indignation or with an overtone of mildness which, nevertheless, suggests wickedness on their part, as it does in Job (4:3): "Behold, you have instructed many" and (4:5): "The scourge has now touched you and you are dismayed." Secondly, their failings toward their neighbor: first, in regard to things taken furtively, when he says: While you preach against stealing, do you steal?: "Your princes are rebels and companions of thieves" (Is 1:23); then in regard to defiling another person through adultery, when he says: You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery?: "They are all adulterers, like a heated oven" (Hos 7:4); "Each neighing for his neighbor’s wife" (Jer 5:8). 234. Thirdly, he indicates their failings with respect to God: first, that they sin against His worship, when he says: You who abhor idols, since you know from the Law that they are not to be adored, do you commit sacrilege by abusing the things of divine worship. 123 This they did during the Old Law: "You profane it when you say that the Lord’s table is polluted" (Mal 1:12) and later, when they blasphemed Christ: "It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons" (Mt 12:24). 235. Secondly, that they sin against His glory, when he says: You who glory in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? For as observance of the Law by good works is an occasion for others to honor God, so its transgression by evil works is an occasion for others to blaspheme: "That they may see your good deeds and glorify God" (1 Pt 2:12). Hence, he says in 1 Tim (6:1): "Let all who are under the yoke of slavery regard their masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be defamed" and in Ps 119 (v.158) it is said: "I look at the faithless with disgust, because they do not keep thy commands." 236. In support of this he quotes an authority, when he says The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, i.e., because the Gentiles, noting the evil practices of the Jews, laid it to evil training dictated by the Law. He says: it is written, namely, in Is 52(:5), "Their rulers wail, and continually all the day my name is despised" and in Ez 36(:22), "It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, but for the sake of my holy name which you have profaned among the nations." 237. Then when he says Circumcision (v.25) he shows that circumcision is not sufficient for salvation any more than the Law is, and for the same reason, namely, that without circumcision there is value in the Law’s observance, without which circumcision has no benefit, as was said above. In regard to this he does three things. 124 First, he compares circumcision to the circumcised Jews; secondly, to the uncircumcised Gentiles, there [v. 26; n. 240] at So, if a man who is uncircumcised; thirdly, he explains what he had said, there [v. 28; n. 242] at For it is not the one who is so outwardly. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows how circumcision is of value; secondly, how not, there [v. 25b; n. 239] at but if you break the law. 238. First, therefore, he says: Circumcision indeed is of value, inasmuch as it remits original sin; hence, it is written in Gen (17:14): "Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin shall be cut off from his people." But it will benefit you as an adult, if you obey the law, just as profession benefits a religious, if he keeps the rule. For circumcision is a form of profession obliging men to observe the Law: "I testify again to every man who receives circumcision that he is bound to keep the whole law" (Gal 5:3). However, the Apostle’s statement in Gal (5:2) that "if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you," refers to the era after grace; but now he is referring to the time before the passion of Christ, when circumcision had status. 239. Secondly, there at but if you break the law (v. 25b), he shows how circumcision has no value, when he says: If you, a Jewish adult, break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision, i.e., has no more value than your previous condition, because you do not observe what you profess by circumcision: "All these nations are uncircumcised and all the house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart" (Jer 125 9:26). In fact they are more guilty for not observing what they promised: "A foolish and faithless promise displeases him" (Ec 5:3). 240. Then when he says, so, if a man who is uncircumcised (v. 26), he considers circumcision in relation to the Gentiles in two ways. First, from the aspect that the Gentiles obtain the benefits of circumcision by observing the Law. Hence he says: Since circumcision profits, if the Law is observed, but not, if it is not; then, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the law, i.e., the moral precepts of the Law: "All your commandments are true" (Ps 119:86), will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? As if to say: He will enjoy the fruit of true circumcision. For a man is circumcised outwardly in the flesh in order to circumcise himself in the heart: "Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, remove the foreskin of your hearts" (Jer 4:4). 241. Secondly, at then those who are physically uncircumcised, he shows that on account of observing the Law the Gentile is preferred to the Jew. Hence he says, Then those who are physically uncircumcised, but keep the law through natural reason will condemn you, the circumcised Jew, who have the written law but break it by transgressing the precepts of the written law and have circumcision, i.e., of the flesh. Hence on the basis of this comparison it is written in Mt (12:4): "The men of Nineveh will arise with this generation...and condemn it." 242. Then when he says For it is not the one who is so outwardly (v. 28) he assigns the reason for his statements. First, he gives the reason; 126 secondly, he proves it, there [v. 29b; n. 245] at His praise. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he assigns the reason why circumcision or Judaism without observance of the Law is fruitless; secondly, why observance of the Law without Judaism and circumcision has value, there [v. 29; n. 244] But he who is so in a hidden way. 243. He says, therefore, that circumcision in one who breaks the Law is uncircumcision and will be judged by the uncircumcised who obey the law, because he is not a real Jew who is one outwardly according to carnal birth: "Not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel..., but the children of the promise are reckoned as descendants" (Rom 9:6-9). Similarly, true circumcision is not that which appears in the flesh, for it is a sign: "It shall be a sign of the covenant between you and me" (Gen 17:11). But it is not a true sign, unless the reality signified corresponds to it. Hence, if a Jew transgressed the covenant, his circumcision would not be true; consequently, it would be regarded as uncircumcision. 244. Then when he says but he who is so in a hidden way (v. 29) he assigns the reason why the uncircumcision of one who keeps the Law is regarded as circumcision and will judge bodily circumcision. The reason is that he is truly a Jew who is one inwardly, i.e., whose heart is possessed by the precepts of the Law, which the Jews professed: "Your father who sees in secret will repay you" (Mt 6:6). Again, true circumcision is of the heart in the spirit, i.e., made by one’s spirit, which expels superfluous thoughts from the heart. Or in the spirit, i.e., effected by a 127 spiritual and not a literal understanding of the Law: "For we are the true circumcision who worship God in spirit" (Phil 3:3). 245. Then when he says His praise (v29b) he proves this reason. For it is obvious that in all matters the divine judgment must prevail over the human. Now things that appear outwardly, such as Judaism or circumcision, are praised by men, but things that exist within are judged according to God’s judgment, because "man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart" (1 Sam 16:7). Hence, inward Judaism and circumcision prevail over the outward. And this is what he says: His [whose] praise, i.e., of inward circumcision, is not from men but from God: "It is not the man who commends himself that is accepted, but the man whom the Lord commends" (2 Cor 10:18). |