The grounds we have for hope in Christ. Sin and death came by Adam, grace and life by Christ.
Hauing therfore through faith in Christ, obteined the beginning, he shevveth vvhat great cause vve haue to hope for the accomplishment. 12 And then he procedeth in his arguing, and shevveth that as by one, •l vvere made sinners, so by one, al must he made iust.
1Being justified therefore by faith, let us have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ:Giustificati adunque per mezzo della fede, abbiam pace con Dio per mezzo del Signor nostro Gesù Cristo:BEING iustified therfore by faith, let vs haue peace tovvard God by our Lord IESVS CHRIST:Justificati ergo ex fide, pacem habeamus ad Deum per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum: 2By whom also we have access through faith into this grace wherein we stand: and glory in the hope of the glory of the sons of God.Per cui abbiamo adito in virtù della fede a simil grazia, nella quale stiam, saldi, e ci gloriamo della speranza della gloria dei figliuoli di Dio.by vvhō also vve haue accesse through faith into this grace vvherein vve stand, and glorie, in the hope of the glorie of the sonnes of God.per quem et habemus accessum per fidem in gratiam istam, in qua stamus, et gloriamur in spe gloriæ filiorum Dei. 3And not only so: but we glory also in tribulations, knowing that tribulation worketh patience;Né solo questo, ma ci gloriamo eziandio delle tribolazioni: sapendo, come la tribolazione produce la pazienza,And not only this: but also vve glorie in tribulations, knovving that tribulation vvorketh patience:Non solum autem, sed et gloriamur in tribulationibus: scientes quod tribulatio patientiam operatur: 4And patience trial; and trial hope;La pazienza lo sperimento, lo sperimento la speranza,and patience, probation: and probation, hope.patientia autem probationem, probatio vero spem, 5And hope confoundeth not: because the charity of God is poured forth in our hearts, by the Holy Ghost who is given to us.La speranza poi non porta rossore: perché la carità di Dio è stata diffusa ne' nostri cuori per mezzo dello Spirito santo, il quale è stato a noi dato.and hope confoundeth not: because the charitie of God is povvred forth in our hartes, by the holy Ghost vvhich is giuen vs.spes autem non confundit: quia caritas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris per Spiritum Sanctum, qui datus est nobis. 6For why did Christ, when as yet we were weak, according to the time, die for the ungodly?Imperocché per qual motivo, quando noi eravamo tutt'ora infermi, Cristo a suo tempo morì per gli empj?For vvhy did Christ, vvhen vve as yet vvere vveake, according to the time die for the impious?Ut quid enim Christus, cum adhuc infirmi essemus, secundum tempus, pro impiis mortuus est ? 7For scarce for a just man will one die: yet perhaps for a good man some one would dare to die.Or a mala pena alcuno morirà per un giusto: ma pur forse saravvi, chi abbia cuor di morire per un uomo dabbene.For, scarse for a iust man doth any die: for perhaps for a good man durst some man die.vix enim pro justo quis moritur: nam pro bono forsitan quis audeat mori.
8But God commendeth his charity towards us: because when as yet we were sinners according to the time.Ma dà a conoscere Dio la carità sua verso di noi, mentre essendo noi tuttor peccatori, nel tempo opportunoBut God commendeth his charitie in vs: because, vvhen as yet vve vvere sinners, Christ died for vs.Commendat autem caritatem suam Deus in nobis: quoniam cum adhuc peccatores essemus, secundum tempus, 9Christ died for us. Much more therefore, being now justified by his blood, shall we be saved from wrath through him.Cristo per noi morì: molto più adunque al presente giustificati nel sangue di lui, sarem salvati dall'ira per mezzo di lui.Much more therfore now being iustified in his bloud, shal vve be saued from vvrath by him.Christus pro nobis mortuus est: multo igitur magis nunc justificati in sanguine ipsius, salvi erimus ab ira per ipsum. 10For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son: much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.Che se, quando eravamo nemici, fummo riconciliati con Dio mediante la morte del Figliuol suo: molto più essendo riconciliati, sarem salvi per lui vivente.For if, vvhen vve vvere enemies, vve vvere recōciled to God by the death of his Sonne: much more being reconciled, shal vve be saued in the life of him.Si enim cum inimici essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem filii ejus: multo magis reconciliati, salvi erimus in vita ipsius. 11And not only so: but also we glory in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received reconciliation.Né questo solo: ma ci gloriamo in Dio per Gesù Cristo Signor nostro, pel mezzo di cui abbiamo adesso ricevuto la riconciliazione.And not only this: but also vve glorie in God through our Lord IESVS Christ, by vvhom novv vve haue receiued reconciliation.Non solum autem: sed et gloriamur in Deo per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, per quem nunc reconciliationem accepimus. 12Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world and by sin death: and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.Per la qual cosa, siccome per un sol uomo entrò il peccato in questo mondo, e pel peccato la morte, così ancora a tutti gli uomini si stese la morte, nel qual (uomo) tutti peccarono.Therfore, as by one man sinne entred into this vvorld, and by sinne death: and so vnto al men death did passe, in vvhich al sinned.Propterea sicut per unum hominem peccatum in hunc mundum intravit, et per peccatum mors, et ita in omnes homines mors pertransiit, in quo omnes peccaverunt. 13For until the law sin was in the world: but sin was not imputed, when the law was not.Imperocché sino alla legge il peccato era nel mondo: ma il peccato non s'imputava, non essendovi legge.For euen vnto the Lavv sinne vvas in the world: but sinne was not imputed, when the law was not.Usque ad legem enim peccatum erat in mundo: peccatum autem non imputabatur, cum lex non esset.
14But death reigned from Adam unto Moses, even over them also who have not sinned, after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, who is a figure of him who was to come.Eppure regnò la morte da Adamo fino a Mosè anche sopra coloro, che non peccarono di prevaricazione simile a quella di Adamo, il quale è figura di lui, che doveva venire.But death reigned from Adam vnto Moyses, euen on them also that sinned not after the similitude of the preuarication of Adam, vvho is a figure of him to come.Sed regnavit mors ab Adam usque ad Moysen etiam in eos qui non peccaverunt in similitudinem prævaricationis Adæ, qui est forma futuri. 15But not as the offence, so also the gift. For if by the offence of one, many died: much more the grace of God and the gift, by the grace of one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.Ma non quale il delitto, tale il dono: conciossiacchè se pel delitto di uno molti perirono: molto più la grazia, e la liberalità di Dio è stata ridondante in molti in grazia di un uomo (cioè) di Gesù Cristo.But not as the offence, so also the gift. for if by the offence of one, many died: much more the grace of God and the gift. in the grace of one man IESVS Christ, hath abounded vpon many.Sed non sicut delictum, ita et donum: si enim unius delicto multi mortui sunt: multo magis gratia Dei et donum in gratia unius hominis Jesu Christi in plures abundavit. 16And not as it was by one sin, so also is the gift. For judgment indeed was by one unto condemnation: but grace is of many offences unto justification.E non è tale il dono, quale la prevaricazione per uno, che peccò: imperocchè il giudizio da un delitto alla condannazione: la grazia poi da molti delitti alla giustificazione.And not as by one sinne', so also the gift, for iudgemēt in deede is of one, to condemnatiō: but grace is of many offences, to iustificatiō.Et non sicut per unum peccatum, ita et donum. Nam judicium quidem ex uno in condemnationem: gratia autem ex multis delictis in justificationem. 17For if by one man’s offence death reigned through one; much more they who receive abundance of grace and of the gift and of justice shall reign in life through one, Jesus Christ.Imperocché se per lo delitto di un solo, per un solo regnò la morte: molto più que', che hanno ricevuto l'abbondanza della grazia, del dono, e della giustizia, regneranno nella vita pel solo Gesù Cristo.For if in the offēce of one, death reigned by one: much more they that receiue the aboundance of grace and of donation & of iustice, shal reigne in life by one, IESVS Christ.Si enim unius delicto mors regnavit per unum: multo magis abundantiam gratiæ, et donationis, et justitiæ accipientes, in vita regnabunt per unum Jesum Christum.
18Therefore, as by the offence of one, unto all men to condemnation: so also by the justice of one, unto all men to justification of life.Quindi è che, siccome pel delitto di un solo (la morte) sopra tutti gli uomini per dannazione: così per la giustizia di un solo (la grazia) a tutti gli uomini per giustificazione vivificante.Therfore as by the offence of one, vnto al men to condemnation: so also by the iustice of one, vnto al men to iustification of life.Igitur sicut per unius delictum in omnes homines in condemnationem: sic et per unius justitiam in omnes homines in justificationem vitæ. 19For as by the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners: so also by the obedience of one, many shall be made just.Conciossiachè siccome per la disubbidienza di un uomo molti son costituiti peccatori: così per la ubbidienza di uno molti saran costituiti giusti.For as by the disobedience of one man, many vvere made sinners: so also by the obedience of one, many shal be made iust.Sicut enim per inobedientiam unius hominis, peccatores constituti sunt multi: ita et per unius obeditionem, justi constituentur multi. 20Now the law entered in that sin might abound. And where sin abounded, grace did more abound.La legge poi subentrò, perché abbondasse il peccato. Ma dove abbondò il peccato, soprabbondò la grazia:But the Lavv entred in, that sinne might abound. And vvhere sinne abounded, grace did more abound.Lex autem subintravit ut abundaret delictum. Ubi autem abundavit delictum, superabundavit gratia: 21That as sin hath reigned to death: so also grace might reign by justice unto life everlasting, through Jesus Christ our Lord.Onde siccome regnò il peccato, dando la morte, così pure regni la grazia mediante la giustizia per dare la vita eterna per Gesù Cristo Signor nostro.that as sinne reigned to death: so also grace may reigne by iustice to life euerlasting, through IESVS Christ our Lord.ut sicut regnavit peccatum in mortem: ita et gratia regnet per justitiam in vitam æternam, per Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum.
5:1
The apostle proceeds in this chapter to shew how great a benefit it is to be truly justified by the coming of Christ.
Witham
Let us have [Ver. 1. Pacem habeamus. In the common Greek copies we read echomen, habemus. But in other manuscripts echomen, as St. Chrysostom must have read by his commentary, meke[] amartanomen. etc.] peace with God. That is, says St. Chrysostom, by laying aside all contentions. Or let us have peace with God by sinning no more. And this peace we may have under the greatest tribulations, which conduce to our greater good, to an increase in virtues, in patience, in hope, in the love of God, etc. (Witham)
5:3
Estius
We glory in spirit in the afflictions, oppression, and persecution, which we suffer as Christians, esteeming them a great blessing. Thus the apostles went rejoicing from before the council, because they had been thought worthy to suffer disgrace for the name of Jesus. (Acts v.) And St. James (James 1.) says: Think it the greatest joy when you fall into various temptations: (that is, tribulations) for these sufferings greatly serve to confirm the elect in the hopes which they have of enjoying the glory of the world to come. (Estius)
5:5
Calmet
God having prevented us with his gifts when we did not at all deserve them, having showered upon us the blessings of faith, charity, patience, and fidelity, we cannot but have the greatest confidence that after this pledge and assurance of his good will towards us, he well finish the work he has begun, and bring us to his heavenly kingdom. (Calmet)
Menochius
Not only the gift of the Holy Spirit, but the Spirit himself, is given to us, who resides in our soul as in his own temple, who sanctifies it, and makes it partaker of his divine love. (Menochius)
5:6
etc. Why did Christ...die for the ungodly? He shews Christ's great mercy and love for mankind, that he would die for us, who were sinners, and consequently his enemies. How few are there that will lay down their lives for a just man, or for a just cause?
Witham
Perhaps for a good man. That is, for another, who has been good to him, his friend or benefactor, we may find one that will expose or lay down his life. But Christ, in due time, appointed by the divine decree, died for sinners, for us all. And if we have been reconciled to God, and justified by his death; now being made the children of God, and his friends, we may with greater confidence hope to be saved. (Witham)
Calmet
The text of the Greek is as follows: For when we were weak, he gave us our Lord Jesus Christ to redeem us; shewing how much God loved us, to perform such stupendous acts of love in our behalf. But the reading of the Vulgate is conformable to St. Irenaeus, (lib. 3:chap. 18.) and to the commentaries of this epistle, which have been published under the name of St. Ambrose, and St. Jerome. (Calmet)
Ep. lix. ad Paulinum
St. Augustine says, those whom the apostle first calls weak, he afterwards calls impious, hos dixit infirmos quos impios. (Ep. lix. ad Paulinum.)
Calmet
St. Jerome, and other fathers and commentators, explain the Greek text of this verse as follows: Scarcely would any one die for a just cause; for who would ever think of dying in defence of injustice? Others explain it thus: Scarcely a single man would die for one that was wicked and unjust: for we can hardly find a person ready to lay down his life for a good man; his friend and benefactor, who has been kind to him. (Calmet)
5:12
Witham
As by one man...in whom [Ver. 12. In quo omnes peccaverunt, eph o pantes emarton. If it agreed with sin, in the Greek it must have been eph es.] all have sinned. That is, in which man all sinned, (not in which death all sinned) as it must be the construction by the Greek text: so that these words are a clear proof of original sin against the Pelagian heretics, as St. Augustine often brings them. Nor does St. Chrysostom deny original sin, though in this place he expounds it that all by Adam's sin were made guilty of death and punishments. But how could they deserve these, had they not sinned in Adam? (Witham)
5:13
Witham
Until the law, sin was in the world. That is, from Adam's fall, both original sin and actual sins truly infected all mankind. (Witham)
Challoner
Not imputed. That is, men knew not, or made no account of sin; neither was it imputed to them, in the manner it was afterwards, when they transgressed the known written law of God. (Challoner)
All were conceived and born in sin, in what we call original sin, and liable to death, even infants, who were not come to the use of reason, and consequently could not sin after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, or by imitating his sin, but were born in sin: and besides this, all manner of actual sins, which men committed by their own perverse will, reigned every where in the world. But before the law these sins were not imputed, that is, were not declared sins, that deserved such punishments as were ordained by the law.
Witham
Adam, who is a figure of him that was to come. That is, of Christ, whom the apostle calls the last Adam, 1 Corinthians 15:45. But he was a figure by contraries. By the first Adam, sin and death entered into the world; by Christ, justice and life. (Witham)
5:15
Witham
etc. But not as the offence, so also is the gift, or the benefits which mankind receive by their Redeemer, Jesus Christ. For St. Paul here shews that the graces which Christ came to bestow upon men, and offers to all, are much greater than the evils which the sin of one man, Adam, caused. 1. Because, if by the offence of that one man, Adam, many, that is all died by original sin that descended from Adam, (the blessed Virgin mother by a special privilege being always excepted) much more the grace of one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many,[Ver. 15. Abundavit in plures; Greek eis tous pollous, in multos; so that it is not to be taken comparatively for more, but absolutely for many, or for all; because all here are many, as in other places.] the comparison does not imply that more in number receive the grace of Christ, than were infected with sin; but that they who receive the graces which are offered to all, receive greater benefits than were the damages caused by the sin of Adam. For the judgment indeed was by one unto condemnation, or so as to make all guilty of one sin, that is, of original sin; and for other actual sins, men committed them by their own proper will; whereas the grace of Christ justifies men from many sins; that is, also from all sins which they have committed by their own malice. 2. Because by it, that is, by the offence of one man, death reigned in the world, and made all men liable to damnation; yet now by the incarnation of Christ, (which would not have been, had not Adam sinned) all they who are justified by the grace of their Redeemer, have Christ God and man for their head: he is become the head of that same mystical body which is his Church: they are exalted to the dignity of being the brothers of Christ, the Son of God; they are made joint heirs with him of the kingdom of heaven, and so by the grace of Christ have a greater dignity in this world, and shall be exalted to a greater and more eminent degree of glory in the kingdom of his glory for all eternity; which hath given occasion to the Church, in her liturgy, to cry out, as it were with a transport of joy, O happy fault, which hath procured us such and so great a Redeemer! See St. Chrysostom,[Ver. 19. See St. Chrysostom, hom. x. p. 73. Ed Savil. eis uiothesian echthemen ... kai egenometha adelphoi tou monogenous, etc.] hom. X. (Witham)
5:20
Witham
Now the law entered in. Not that the law was designed for that end; but the word that, as in many other places, so here expresseth only the consequence that followed, when sinners occasionally became more guilty by the knowledge of the law, and the precepts given. St. Chrysostom takes notice that it is not said the law was given, but only that it entered in, as it were by the by, and only for a certain time, till our happy redemption, reconciliation, and justification by Jesus Christ. (Witham)
Challoner
That sin might abound. Not as if the law were given purposely for sin to abound; but that it so happened, through man's perversity, taking occasion of sinning more, from the prohibition of sin. (Challoner)
Estius
Where sin abounded. Grace abounded in the elect; for the apostle does not say that grace abounded in every place where iniquity had abounded; but he says indefinitely where, that is, in many places where sin abounded, grace hath abounded also. (Estius)
Calmet
The Jews and Gentiles having become sensible of their weakness and misery, the Almighty, in his mercy, sent his only Son to enrich both the one and the other with his graces. The Gentiles were in the more deplorable case, and received the greatest abundance of grace; as may be seen from the great number of conversions wrought amongst them in so short a time in every part of the world. (Calmet)
Menochius
In the Greek it is pareiselthe, entered in by stealth, as it were, and for a time, till the preaching of the gospel. (Menochius)
5:12
By one man.... Adam, from whom we all contracted original sin.
5:13
Not imputed.... That is, men knew not, or made no account of sin, neither was it imputed to them, in the manner it was afterwards, when they transgressed the known written law of God.
5:20
That sin might abound.... Not as if the law were given on purpose for sin to abound: but that it so happened through man’s perversity, taking occasion of sinning more, from the prohibition of sin.
5:1
1. Let vs haue.) Against the Heretikes special faith and securitie. Vvhether vve read, 〈Greek〉 Let vs haue peace, as diuerse also of the Greeke Doctors (Chrysost. Orig. Theodor. O••um. Theophyl.) doe, or, We haue peace: it maketh nothing for the vaine securitie and infallible certaintie vvhich our Aduersaries say, euery man ought to haue vpon his presumed iustification by faith, that him self is in Gods fauour, and sure to be saued: peace tovvards God, being here nothing els, but the sincere rest, tranquillitie and comfort of minde and conscience, vpon the hope he hath, that he is reconciled to God. Sure it is that the Catholike faith, by vvhich, and none other, men be iustified, neither teacheth nor breedeth any such securitie of saluation. And therfore they haue made to them selues an other faith vvhich they call Fiducia•, quite vvithout the compasse of the Creede and Scriptures.
In the liturgy The Epistle on Imber Saturday in vvhitsonweeke, And for many Martyrs.
5:2
2. Accesse through faith.) Iustificatiō attributed much to faith as to the f⸢u⸣ndation. Iustification, implieth al grace and vertues receiued by Christes merites, but the entrance and accesse to this grace and happy state is by faith, because faith is the ground and first foundation to build on, and port to enter into the rest. Vvhich is the cause that out lustification is attributed to faith, namely in this Epistle, though faith it self be of grace also.
Christian mē do not vaunt thē selues of the certaītie of their saluatiō, but glorie in the hope thereof onely, vvhich hope is here insinuated to be giuen in our iustificatiō, & is aftervvard to be cōfirmed by probation in tribulation.
5:4
4. Probation hope.) Our hope is strengthened by vvel doing. This refelleth the errour also of the Protestants, that vvould haue our hope to hold only on Gods promises, and not a vvhit on our doings. Vvhere vve see that it standeth (and is strengthened also) vpon patience and constancie, and good probation and trial of our selues in aduersities: and that so grounded vpon Gods promises and our ovvne doing, it neuer confoundeth.
5:5
5. Charitie is povvred.) Charitie is a qualitie in vs. Charitie also is giuen vs in our first iustification, and not only imputed vnto vs, but in deede invvardly povvred into our hartes by the Holy Ghost, vvho vvith and in his giftes & grace is bestovved vpon vs. for this Charitie of God is not that vvhich is in God, but that vvhich he giueth vs, as S. Augustine expoundeth it: li. de Sp. & lit. c. 32. Vvho referreth this place also to the grace of God giuen in the Sacrament of Confirmation, de bapt. cont. Donat. li. • c. 16.
5:6
〈Greek〉
The Heretikes falsely translate, of no strength, to take avvay al free vvil. No. Test. 15•0.
5:12
12. By one man sinne entred.) By this place specially the Church of God defendeth and proueth against the old Heretikes the Pelagians, Conc. Tri. sess. s• decr. de pe•. orig. that denied children to haue any original sinne, or to be baptized for the remission thereof: Al by Adam borne in original sinne. that in and by Adam al be conceiued, borne, and constituted sinners. Which no lesse maketh against the Caluinists also, that affirme, Christiā mens children to be holy from their mothers vvombe. And the same reason vvhich S. Augustine deduceth (li. • c. •. 9. de pec. meritis.) out of this text, to proue against the said Pelagians, that the Apostle meaneth not of the general imitation of Adam in actual sinnes, serueth against Erasmus and others, inclining rather to that nevv exposition, then to the Churches and fathers graue iudgement herein. Cone. Mileuitanum c. 2.
5:14
14. vnto Moyses.) Euen in the time of the Lavv of nature, vvhen men knevv not sinne, and therfore it could not by mans iudgement be imputed: and in the time of Moyses Lavv, vvhen the commaundement taught them to knovv it, but gaue them no strength nor grace to auoid it, sinne did reigne, Christ only not conceiued in sinne, and (as it is thought) our B. Lady. and therevpon death and damnation, euen til Moyses inclusiuè, that is to say, euen til the end of his Lavv. And that not in them onely vvhich actually sinned, as Adam did, but in infants vvhich neuer did actually offend, but onely vvere borne and conceiued in sinne, that is to say, hauing their natures defiled, destitute of iustice, and auerted from God in Adam, and by their descent from him: Christ onely excepted, being conceiued vvithout mans seede, and his mother for his honour and by his special protection (as many godly deuou• men iudge) preserued from the same.
5:16
sinner,
5:19
Here vve may see against the Heretikes, that they vvhich, be borne of Christ and iustified by him, be made & constituted iust in deede, & not by imputation only: as al that be borne of Adam, be vniust and sinners in truth, & not by imputation.
5:20
20. That sinne might abound.) The Lavv did not cause more sinne, though that vvere the sequele thereof. That, here hath not the signification of causalitie, as though the Lavv vvere giuen for that cause to make sinne abound: but it noteth the sequele, because that folovved thereof, and so it came to passe, that by the prohibition of sinne, sinne increased: by occasion vvhereof, the force of Christes grace is more amply and aboundantly bestovved in the nevv Testament.
5:1
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 7
Ver. 21 . “But now the righteousness of God without the Law is manifested.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 9
Chap. v. ver. 1 . “Therefore being justified by faith, let us have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 24
… What then is its meaning? They are noble greaves, doubtless, with which he invests us. Either then he means this, that we should be prepared for the gospel, and should make use of our feet for this, and should prepare and make ready its way before it;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Rebuke and Grace 46
… For this is the case when we endeavour to lead every individual to that point where they may meet with those agencies by which we may prevail, to the accomplishment of the result, that being justified by faith they may have peace with God,
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 26
… the rest of the blessed and our eternal home; whose proper work and special office it is to join to God those whom it removes from the world. Whence the Apostle incites us to this good end, in saying, “being justified therefore by faith let us have peace towards God
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 95
“Blessed are the peace-makers, for they shall be called the sons of God .” This blessedness, beloved, belongs not to any and every kind of agreement and harmony, but to that of which the Apostle speaks: “have peace towards God
5:2
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Exhortation to Martyrdom, Addressed to Fortunatus 9
… “We glory in the hope of the glory of God. And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also; knowing that tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope; and hope maketh not ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given unto us.”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews 3.7
… “We glory in hope of the glory of God. And not only so, but we also glory in afflictions: knowing that affliction worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope: and hope does not confound; because the love of God is infused in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, which is given unto us.”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 8
17. When , then, the apostle “thanks God through Jesus Christ,” and again says that “through Him” we have “received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations,” or “through Him have access unto this grace wherein we stand and rejoice,”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 7
… “By what law? of works? Nay, but by the law of faith.” See he calls the faith also a law delighting to keep to the names, and so allay the seeming novelty. But what is the “law of faith?” It is, being saved by grace. Here he shows God’s power, in that He has not only saved, but has even justified, and led them to boasting,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 9
Ver. 2 . “By Whom also we have access,” he says, “by faith unto this grace. (7 mss. add, unto, etc.)
5:3
Tertullian † AD 220 Scorpiace 13
… “And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also, being sure that tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope; and hope maketh not ashamed.”
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 1.24
… And if the boasting of the saints is in their tribulations, since
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 3
… In times of ease, he failed not, and in afflictions he gloried, knowing that ‘tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope, and that hope maketh not ashamed
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 13
… Had they however known that ‘tribulation perfecteth patience, and patience experience, and experience hope, and hope maketh not ashamed,’ they would have exercised themselves, after the example of Paul, who said, ‘I keep under my body and bring it into subjection, lest when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 2.55
55. He glories in his infirmities and distresses. He takes pleasure in the dying of Jesus, as if it were a kind of ornament. He is lofty in carnal things,
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Duties of the Clergy 1.36
183. This is the true fortitude which Christ’s warrior has, who receives not the crown unless he strives lawfully. Or does that call to fortitude seem to thee but a poor one: “Tribulation worketh patience, and patience, experience, and experience, hope”?
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Treatise to Prove that No One Can Harm the Man Who Does Not Injure Himself 5
… and why need I mention the greater part of them? he was dying every day: but yet, although subjected to so many and such grievous sufferings, he not only uttered no blasphemous word, but rejoiced over these things and gloried in them: and one time he says “I rejoice in my sufferings,” and then again “not only this but we also glory in afflictions.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 To Olympias 1
… And as the fire makes the piece of gold, when it is applied to it, of better proof: so also affliction when it visits golden characters renders them purer and more proven. Wherefore also Paul said “affliction worketh patience, and patience probation.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 1.23
23. But if it were necessary to add a ninth reason, we might say, that this tribulation maketh those who are troubled more approved; “For tribulation worketh patience; and patience, probation; and probation, hope; and hope maketh not ashamed.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 4.4
… since tribulation makes the strong man stronger. Who saith this? It is the man who lived in tribulation, the blessed Paul; he speaks thus: “Tribulation worketh patience, and patience probation, and probation hope.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 16.9
… Whence is this apparent? “I rejoice,” saith he, “in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh.” And again; “Unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on Him, but to suffer for His sake.” And again; “And not only so, but we also glory in tribulations.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 16.12
Knowing these things then, let us not be depressed, when adverse affairs meet us, but then let us be more strong, then more powerful; “for tribulation worketh patience.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 18.10
… “And not only so, but we glory in tribulations.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 42
… Those who are wretched and outcasts, or those who are inflated with consequence, and in enjoyment? It is not possible that any evil can happen from a soul that is afflicted. ( James ii. 6 .) Paul knew the gain of this: therefore he says, “Tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope, and hope maketh not ashamed.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 7
… “By what law? of works? Nay, but by the law of faith.” See he calls the faith also a law delighting to keep to the names, and so allay the seeming novelty. But what is the “law of faith?” It is, being saved by grace. Here he shows God’s power, in that He has not only saved, but has even justified, and led them to boasting,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 9
Ver. 3 . “And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 1
… i. 4 .) He saith not, “Who suffereth us not to come into affliction:” but, “Who comforteth in affliction.” For this at once declareth the power of God; and increaseth the patience of those afflicted. For, saith he, “tribulation worketh patience.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 22.40
… and smitten with His arrows, we shall say every moment: “Woe is me that I have prolonged my pilgrimage.” For “the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.” For “tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope; and hope maketh not ashamed.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 108.18
… She recalled to mind also the words of the apostle, “we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope: and hope maketh not ashamed”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 130.7
… It is for this reason also that the apostle says: “we glory in tribulations.…knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience experience; and experience hope; and hope maketh not ashamed;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 145.7
… knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope: and hope maketh not ashamed;”—not that we can do this of ourselves, but “because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Christian Doctrine 4.7
… For who would not see what the apostle meant to say, and how wisely he has said it, in the following passage: “We glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope: and hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Morals of the Catholic Church 23
42. Instead of quoting here authorities from the New Testament, where it is said, "Tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience and experience, hope;"
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 39
… And of this spirit the same Apostle Paul discourses to the Romans: “We glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope; and hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 1.5
… knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope: and hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 2.17
… For, says He, “we glory in tribulations also; knowing that tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope: And hope maketh not ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 4.2
… For, “tribulation and straitness is on every soul of man that doeth evil.” But he who says, “We rejoice in tribulations, knowing that tribulation worketh patience;” up to that where he says, “Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 9.2
2. “I will confess unto Thee, O Lord, with my whole heart” ( ver. 1 ). He doth not, with a whole heart, confess unto God, who doubteth of His Providence in any particular: but he who sees already the hidden things of the wisdom of God, how great is His invisible reward, who saith, “We rejoice in tribulations;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 37.2.5
… “The Lord strengtheneth the righteous.—Not only so” (saith that same Paul, whilst suffering many evils), “but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience; and experience hope; but hope maketh not ashamed, because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 37.2.8
… “We glory in tribulation; knowing that tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope; but hope maketh not ashamed.” Whence is it that hope “maketh not ashamed”? Because it is placed on God. Therefore follows immediately, “Because the love of God is spread in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 57.13
… Hear the heart prepared in an Apostle, because he hath imitated his Lord: “We glory,” he saith, “in tribulations: because tribulation worketh patience: patience probation, probation hope, but hope maketh not ashamed: because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit, which hath been given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 58.16
… What fruit? “In hope rejoicing, in tribulation enduring.” What fruit to the just man? “We glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation worketh patience, but patience probation, but probation hope: but hope confoundeth not: because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit, that hath been given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 71.7
… “for Thou art my patience” ( ver. 5 ). Now if He is patience rightly, He is that also which followeth, “O Lord, my hope from my youth.” My patience, because my hope: or rather my hope, because my patience. “Tribulation,” saith the Apostle, “worketh patience, patience probation, but probation hope, but hope confoundeth not.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 118.9
… 15 ); where they who raged against their bodies thought there was the voice of sorrow and destruction. For they did not know the inward joy of the saints in their future hope. Whence the Apostle also saith, “As sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing;” and again, “And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also.”
5:4
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Defence of His Flight. (Apologia de Fuga.) 21
… ‘As many as will live godly in Christ, shall suffer persecution .’ And so he straightway prepared them that fled for the trial, saying, ‘Let us run with patience the race that is set before us ;’ for although there be continual tribulations, ‘yet tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope, and hope maketh not ashamed
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 75
… let him cast him into dishonor. What this to him who accounts the things present, the flower of the grass? If thou wilt, let him also torture his body, and cast him into prison, what this to him that hath learnt, “Though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed;” and that “tribulation worketh approval?”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles 35
… They were doing God’s work, and suffered these things! They did not say, Why do we preach this, and God does not take our part? But even this was a benefit to them, even apart from the truth, in the thing itself; it made them more vigorous, stronger, intrepid. “Tribulation worketh endurance.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 9
Ver. 4, 5 . “And patience experience, and experience hope; and hope maketh not ashamed.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 21
… For there is nothing which makes the soul so courageous and venturesome for anything as a good hope. Then even before the good things hoped for, he gives another reward again. For since hope is of things to come, he says, “patient in tribulation.” And before the things to come, in this life present thou wilt gain a great good (see on
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 28
… For as the grass shall they be dried up, and as the green herb shall they soon fall away.” ( ib. xxxvii. 1, 2 ) Dost thou see both righteous and sinners punished? be told that the cause is not the same. For “many” he says, “are the plagues of sinners.” ( ib. xxxii. 10 .) But in the case of the righteous, he does not say plagues,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Second Corinthians 9
… For it both showed the power of God, and more disclosed His grace. For, saith He, “My grace is sufficient for thee.” ( 2 Cor. xii. 9 .) It also anointed them unto lowliness of mind, and prepared them for keeping down the rest, and made them to be more hardy. “For patience,” saith he, “worketh probation, and probation hope.” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 13.10
14. Since those also which are called our deserts, are His gifts. For, that faith may work by love, “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”
Sharbil said: To thine unbelieving heart these things seem as if they were afflictions; but to the true heart “affliction imparts patience, and from it comes also experience, and from experience likewise the hope”
5:5
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 11
… how blessed will it not be, my brethren! who will not, at that time, be engaged, praying rightly? For the walls of every adverse power, yea even of Jericho especially, falling down, and the gift
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 1.3
40. Where, then, the grace of the Spirit is asserted, is that of God the Father or of the Only-begotten Son denied? By no means; for as the Father is in the Son, and the Son in the Father, so, too, “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, Who hath been given us.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 1.5
… “Unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given;” so, too, is the grace of the Spirit given. But why should I hesitate to say that the Holy Spirit also is given to us, since it is written: “The love of God is shed forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, Who is given to us.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 1.8
94. God, then, sheds forth of the Spirit, and the love of God is also shed abroad through the Spirit; in which point we ought to recognize the unity of the operation and of the grace. For as God shed forth of the Holy Spirit, so also “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit;”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 3.8
… As for the fact that He is “given,” listen to the prophet’s words: “And grant us Thy salvation.” But that which is above us is given: what is from heaven is given: even as indeed we read concerning the Spirit, that “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, Who is given unto us.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 16
… for he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is a minister of God.” And again, enjoining us to be subject unto him, he sets forth not the fear of God only, but the threatening also of the other party, and his watchful care. “For ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Philippians 3
… “Let thy mercy, O Lord, be upon us, according as we have hoped in Thee.” ( Ps. xxxiii. 22 .) And as it is written in another place, “Look to the generations of old and see, did any one hope in the Lord, and was made ashamed?” ( Ecclus. ii. 10 .) And again, this same blessed one says, “Hope putteth not to shame.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 1 Timothy 12
… And I need not say that many who have toiled and endured hardships have been disappointed at the very entrance of the harbor, and an adverse wind has caused the wreck of their hopes, when they were upon the point of possession. But with us there is nothing like this. For it is God who promised, and that “hope maketh not ashamed.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 2 Timothy 5
… For if the Resurrection is past, retribution also is past. The good therefore have reaped persecutions and afflictions, and the wicked have not been punished, nay verily, they live in great pleasure.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 36
… And on men we wait for so long a time, warring and enduring hardships and performing servile ministrations, and often at last failing in our expectation, but on our Master, from whom we are sure to obtain a recompense greater than our labors, (for, saith the Apostle, “Hope maketh not ashamed”—
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 4.4
… He had grown up with me from childhood, and we had been both school-fellows and play-fellows. But he was not then my friend, nor, indeed, afterwards, as true friendship is; for true it is not but in such as Thou bindest together, cleaving unto Thee by that love which is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 13.7
8. Hence let him that is able now follow Thy apostle with his understanding where he thus speaks, because Thy love “is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 13.31
… and another, that when a man sees a thing to be good, God should in him see that it is good,—that in truth He may be loved in that which He made, who cannot be loved unless by the Holy Ghost, which He hath given. “Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 55.19
19. Because, therefore, “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given to us,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 55.20
… things were made, is a creature, the second commandment is, “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.” And because God sanctified the seventh day, on which He rested, the Holy Spirit—in whom is given to us that rest which we love everywhere, but find only in loving God, when “His love is shed abroad in us, by the Holy Ghost given unto us”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 82.20
… for “love is the fulfilling of the law.” Now “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts,” not by our own power, but “by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 92.1
… What you may gain from my letter it is for yourself to judge; I at least felt that I should neither refuse nor delay compliance with your request. May your own faith and hope comfort you, and that love which is shed abroad in the hearts of the pious by the Holy Ghost,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 145.3
… But by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us, the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 145.7
7. This love of God, which must be maintained by unremitting, devout meditation, “is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given to us,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 188.3
… Let it not appear to you a trifling error that men should wish to profess themselves Christians, and yet be unwilling to hear the apostle of Christ, who, having said, “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts,” lest any one should think that he had this love through his own free will, immediately subjoined, “by the Holy Spirit who is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 189.2
… “For this is the love which,” as the apostle says, “is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 218.2
… because even the love of God, which, when it is perfect, “casteth out fear,” is shed abroad in our hearts, not by our strength, that is, by any human power, but, as the apostle says, “by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 12.9
… We must therefore acknowledge, with the praise due to the Creator, that not only of holy men, but also of the holy angels, it can be said that “the love of God is shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto them.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 17.20
… but the princes of the city of Christ patiently wait for the time of a blessedness that is not fallacious. This is expressed by the words, “in fortitude, and not in confusion,” because hope does not deceive them; of which the apostle says, “But hope maketh not ashamed.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 7.3
… by following God made man, he might follow at once Him whom he could perceive, and whom he ought to follow. Let us then love Him and cleave to Him, by charity spread abroad in our hearts, through the Holy Spirit which is given unto us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 8.7
… not without cause the Scripture mostly puts one for both: whether it be of God only, as is that text, “For we know that all things work together for good to them that love God;” and again, “But if any man love God, the same is known of Him;” and that, “Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 15.17
… For man has not whence to love God, unless from God; and therefore he says a little after, “Let us love Him, because He first loved us.” The Apostle Paul, too, says, “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 15.26
46. But the reason why, after His resurrection, He both gave the Holy Spirit, first on earth, and afterwards sent Him from heaven, is in my judgment this: that “love is shed abroad in our hearts,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 117
… For faith obtains through prayer that which the law commands. For without the gift of God, that is, without the Holy Spirit, through whom love is shed abroad in our hearts,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 121
… For this love embraces both the love of God and the love of our neighbor, and “on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Catechising of the Uninstructed 14
… For these things indeed which are uttered here are spoken, not so much by me to you, as rather to us all by that very “love which is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit that is given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Catechising of the Uninstructed 23
41. “Thereafter, having confirmed the disciples, and having sojourned with them forty days, He ascended up into heaven, as these same persons were beholding Him. And on the completion of fifty days from His resurrection He sent to them the Holy Spirit (for so He had promised), by whose agency they were to have love shed abroad in their hearts,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Faith and the Creed 9
… And this opinion of theirs they support by many proofs drawn from the Scriptures; among which we might instance either the passage which says, “For the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, who has been given unto us,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Patience 14
… as also that each one of the just is in that measure for endurance of any ills more brave, in what measure in him the love of God is mightier. But lust of the world hath its beginning from choice of the will, its progress from enjoyableness of pleasure, its confirmation from the chain of custom, whereas “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Patience 22
… in whatever way it endure what bitterness and hardships soever, it is the love of God which “endureth all things,” and which is not shed abroad in our hearts but by the Holy Spirit given unto us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Morals of the Catholic Church 13
… and by this conformation, and configuration, and circumcision from this world we are not confounded with the things which are properly subject to us. And this is done by the Holy Spirit. "For hope," he says, "does not confound us; for the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, which is given unto us."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Morals of the Catholic Church 16
29. Paul says, "The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us;"
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 12.14
… That the breadth reaches to fifty cubits; as the apostle says, "Our heart is enlarged," that is, with spiritual love, of which he says again, "The love of God is shed abroad in our heart by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 17.6
… "Love is the fulfilling of the law," as the apostle says. The Lord has vouchsafed both to manifest and to impart this love, by sending the Holy Spirit to His believing people. So it is said by the same apostle: "The love of God is shed abroad in our heart by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 32.18
… For "He was not yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glorified." We have proof also that He leads into all truth, for the only way to truth is by love, and "the love of God," says the apostle, "is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost who is given unto us."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Baptism, Against the Donatists 3.16
Chapter 16.— 21. But when it is said that "the Holy Spirit is given by the imposition of hands in the Catholic Church only, I suppose that our ancestors meant that we should understand thereby what the apostle says, "Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Correction of the Donatists 11
… Outside this body the Holy Spirit giveth life to no one seeing that, as the apostle says himself, "The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us;"
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 2.27
… And that God may be loved, “His love is shed abroad in our hearts,” not by ourselves, but “by the Holy Ghost that is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 5
… Now, in order that such a course may engage our affections, God’s “love is shed abroad in our hearts,” not through the free-will which arises from ourselves, but “through the Holy Ghost, which is given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 25
… not its whole scope amount to this, that the letter which forbids sin fails to give man life, but rather “killeth,” by increasing concupiscence, and aggravating sinfulness by transgression, unless indeed grace liberates us by the law of faith, which is in Christ Jesus, when His love is “shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given to us?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 29
… Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.” Now this was not written on the tables of stone, but “is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 42
… We must therefore avoid saying, that the way in which God assists us to work righteousness, and “works in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure,” is by externally addressing to our faculties precepts of holiness; for He gives His increase internally, by shedding love abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 46
… keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?” And therefore in the house of the true Israel, in which is no guile, they are partakers of the new testament, since God puts His laws into their mind, and writes them in their hearts with his own finger, the Holy Ghost, by whom is shed abroad in them the love
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 49
… and they were to arrive at such a knowledge of God, that they were not each one to teach his neighbour and brother, saying, Know the Lord; for all were to know Him, from the least to the greatest of them. This is the gift of the Holy Ghost, by which love is shed abroad in our hearts,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 56
… not by dreading punishment, but by loving righteousness. Whence, therefore, arises this love,—that is to say, this charity,—by which faith works, if not from the source whence faith itself obtained it? For it would not be within us, to what extent soever it is in us, if it were not diffused in our hearts by the Holy Ghost who is given to us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 59
… but it believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, and until it arrives at sight, it lives by faith,—even the faith which works by love. And this love is shed abroad in our hearts, not by the sufficiency of our own will, nor by the letter of the law, but by the Holy Ghost who has been given to us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Nature and Grace 18
… Whereas the fulfilling of the law is nothing else than love; and God’s love is shed abroad in our hearts, not by our own selves, but by the Holy Ghost which is given to us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Nature and Grace 49
… Nor do I indeed contend about the actual possibility, forasmuch as the possibility under dispute advances with the realization in the saints, their human will being healed and helped; whilst “the love of God,” as fully as our healed and cleansed nature can possibly receive it, “is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Nature and Grace 67
… Therefore he says, “If ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law,”—even the law which inspires fear, but gives not love. For this “love is shed abroad in our hearts,” not by the letter of the law, but “by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Nature and Grace 77
… For when he speaks of “becoming like unto God,” it is indeed through God’s love that men are to be like unto God,—even the love which is “shed abroad in our hearts,” not by any ability of nature or the free will within us, but “by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Nature and Grace 79
But let us revert to the apostle’s assertion: “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Nature and Grace 84
… But in what place and at what time soever it shall reach that state of absolute perfection, which shall admit of no increase, it is certainly not “shed abroad in our hearts” by any energies either of the nature or the volition that are within us, but “by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 11
… The one enjoins avoidance of evil; the other, pursuit of good. By eschewing covetousness we put off the old man, and by showing love we put on the new. But no man can be continent unless God endow him with the gift; nor is God’s love shed abroad in our hearts by our own selves, but by the Holy Ghost that is given to us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 21
… For as it must again and again be stated, it is “shed abroad in our hearts,” not by our own selves, but “by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 43
… And this God’s grace does, in co-operation with ourselves, through Jesus Christ our Lord, as well by commandments, sacraments, and examples, as by His Holy Spirit also; through whom there is hiddenly shed abroad in our hearts
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 1.10
… For, in order that it may help much, it must help us to feel our need of grace. No man, indeed, is able to fulfil the law through the law. “Love is the fulfilling of the law.” And the love of God is not shed abroad in our hearts by the law, but by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 1.27
… yet where there is no love, no good work is imputed, nor is there any good work, rightly so called; because “whatsoever is not of faith is sin,” and “faith worketh by love.” Hence also that grace of God, whereby “His love is shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 1.31
… As for that grace, indeed, by which we are justified,—in other words, whereby “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 2.28
… For it was by the self-same faith in the one Mediator that the hearts of these, too, were cleansed, and there also was “shed abroad in them the love of God by the Holy Ghost,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.1
… and so death passed upon all men, for in him all sinned;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 4.11
… says, “Knowledge puffeth up, but love edifieth.” Which saying is like to that in which it is said, “The letter killeth, the spirit maketh alive.” For “Knowledge puffeth up,” corresponds to “The letter killeth:” and, “Love edifieth,” to “The spirit maketh alive;” because “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 1.35
53. Wherefore, seeing that Christ Himself is that Wisdom of God by whom all things were created, and considering that no rational intelligences, whether of angels or of men, receive wisdom except by participation in this Wisdom wherewith we are united by that Holy Spirit through whom charity is shed abroad in our hearts
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 21.18
… For what would the knowledge of whatever good we know profit us, unless we also loved it? But as it is by the truth that we learn, so is it by charity that we love, that so we may attain also to a fuller knowledge, and enjoy in blessedness what we know. “Love moreover is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 21.19
… “For it is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 55.5
… “As God,” saith he, “hath distributed to every one the measure of faith.” And hope we have received from Him, to whom it is said, “Wherein Thou hast caused me to hope.” And charity we have received from Him, of whom it is said, “The charity of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which hath been given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 78.4
… The Holy Spirit. He who giveth such a Gift, what is He Himself? For great is God’s mercy; He giveth a Gift equal to Himself; for His Gift is the Holy Spirit, and the Whole Trinity, Father and Son and Holy Spirit, is One God. What hath the Holy Spirit brought us? Hear the Apostle; “The love of God,” saith he, “hath been shed abroad in our hearts.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 95.4
… God. Acknowledge Him in His gifts, that thou feel not His condemnation. By believing the Scriptures, God hath given thee charity, a great boon, charity, which surpasseth all things. God gave it thee, “because the charity of God hath been shed abroad in our hearts;” by thine own self, perhaps? God forbid; “by the Holy Ghost, who hath been given us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 9.8
… Yet the Apostle Paul, setting forth the praise of charity with copiousness and fullness, has said less of it than did the Apostle John in brief, whose Gospel this is. For he has not hesitated to say, “God is love.” It is also written, “Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 17.6
Hear also the apostle when he says, “Love is the fulfilling of the law.” Whence the love? By the grace of God, by the Holy Spirit. For we could not have it from ourselves, as if making it for ourselves. It is the gift of God, and a great gift it is: for, saith he, “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, which is given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 26.1
… “For the fulfilling of the law,” as the apostle says in brief, “is charity.” Charity, that is, love, not of money, but of God; love, not of earth nor of heaven, but of Him who made Heaven and earth. Whence can man have that love? Let us hear the same: “The love of God,” saith he, “is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 27.6
… But that we may be His members, unity joins us together. And what but love can effect that unity should join us together? And the love of God, whence is it? Ask the apostle: “The love of God,” saith he, “is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 32.8
… for without it, whatever thou canst have will profit nothing. But that thou mayest know that the charity of which we are speaking refers to the Holy Spirit (for the question now in hand in the Gospel is concerning the Holy Spirit), hear the apostle when he says, “The charity of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given to us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 39.5
… Is it not still more so here that the Trinity is one God? For thence, of that Holy Spirit, does love come to us, as the apostle says: “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 74.1
… [even] the Spirit of truth.” We have here, at all events, the Holy Spirit in the Trinity, whom the catholic faith acknowledges to be consubstantial and co-eternal with Father and Son: He it is of whom the apostle says, “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, who is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 92
… For, just because ye have been with me from the beginning, ye can preach what ye know; which ye cannot do at present, because the fullness of that Spirit is not yet present within you. “He therefore shall testify of me, and ye also shall bear witness:” for the love of God shed abroad in your hearts by the Holy Spirit, who shall be given unto you,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 93.1
… they who love Thy law, and nothing shall offend them.” Properly enough, therefore, with the promise of the Holy Spirit, by whose operation in their hearts they should be made His witnesses, He added, “These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended.” For when the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit given unto us,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 94.2
… because the charity beareth all things, which was to be shed abroad in their hearts by the gift of the Holy Spirit.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 95.1
… But in my opinion, because there was to be shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Spirit that love
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 96.4
4. Wherefore, beloved, you need not expect to hear from us what the Lord then refrained from telling His disciples, because they were still unable to bear them: but rather seek to grow in the love that is shed abroad in your hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given unto you;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 102.5
… For we could not love the Son unless we loved the Father also. The Father loveth us, because we love the Son; seeing it is of the Father and Son we have received [the power] to love both the Father and the Son: for love is shed abroad in our hearts by the Spirit of both,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John 6.8
… for He maketh intercession for the saints.” How is it said, “The Spirit itself intercedeth for the saints,” but as meaning the charity which is wrought in thee by the Spirit? For therefore saith the same apostle: “The charity of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John 6.9
… Is it not manifest that this is what the Holy Ghost works in man, that there should be in him love and charity? Is it not manifest, as the Apostle Paul saith, that “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given us”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John 6.10
… lest haply thou have the sacrament, and have not the virtue of the sacrament. Question thine heart. If love of thy brethren be there, set thy mind at rest. There cannot be love without the Spirit of God: since Paul cries, “The love of God is shed abroad in your hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John 7.6
… both, “Love is of God,” and, “Love is God.” Of the Father alone the Scripture hath it not to say, that He is “of God:” but when thou hearest that expression, “Of God,” either the Son is meant, or the Holy Ghost. Because while the apostle saith, “The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John 8.12
… This very thing, that He hath given thee of His Spirit, whence comest thou to know it? Ask thine own bowels: if they are full of charity, thou hast the Spirit of God. Whence know we that by this thou knowest that the Spirit of God dwelleth in thee? “Because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 4.2
… I was thirsty, and ye gave Me no drink,” and so forth. Wherefore here also He can say, “Thou hast enlarged me,” for one of the least of His, holding converse with God, whose “love” he has “shed abroad in his heart by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 68.15
… what is that same light burden, but that same love which in these two commandments is fulfilled? For whatever thing is difficult in a commandment, is a light thing to a lover. Nor on any other account is rightly understood the saying, “My burden is light,” but because He giveth the Holy Spirit, whereby love is shed abroad in our hearts,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 72.15
… because the fulness of the law is nought but love, which doth not exist in us of ourselves, but is shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit which hath been given unto us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 78.6
… For fear doth prevail in the law. “But the end of the law is Christ for righteousness to every one believing;” at whose bestowing “love is shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit, which hath been given to us:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 97.17
… but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. “The love,” it saith, “of many shall wax cold.” Whosoever then hath been stedfastly fervent in spirit, as the Apostle saith, “fervent in spirit,” his love shall not wax cold: because “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 104.2
… 3 ). The upper parts of what? Of Heaven. What is Heaven? Figuratively only we said, the Divine Scripture. What are the upper parts of the Divine Scripture? The commandment of love, than which there is none more exalted. But wherefore is love compared to waters? Because “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who is given unto us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.6
… 48 ); or, as some copies read, “which I have loved exceedingly,” or “too much,” or “vehemently,” as they have chosen to render the Greek word σφόδρα . He then loved the commandments of God because he walked at liberty; that is, through the Holy Spirit, through whom love itself is shed abroad,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.15
… For it is said of the future, “and I shall live,” as if we did not live in this dead body. While “we await the redemption of our body, we are saved by hope, and hoping for that we see not, we await with patience.” But hope disappointeth not, if the love of God be spread abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit which is given unto us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.17
… These are Thy wonderful testimonies, which the soul of this little one hath searched; and hath therefore found, because he became humbled and a little one. For who doth Thy commandments as they ought to be done, that is, by “faith which worketh through love,” save love itself be shed abroad in his heart through the Holy Spirit?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 150.1
… and by the addition of the number ten, as a sort of reward added for the fulfilment of the law in good works, eternity itself is figured. This fifty the number one hundred and fifty containeth three times, as though it were multiplied by the Trinity. Wherefore for this reason too we make out that this number of the Psalm is not unsuitable.
John Cassian † AD 435 The Conferences of John Cassian 16.13
… “God is love: he therefore that abideth in love, abideth in God, and God in him.” For so far do we see that it is divine, that we find that what the Apostle says is plainly a living truth in us: “For the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost Who dwelleth in us.”
John Cassian † AD 435 The Conferences of John Cassian 21.33
… Therefore sin has no dominion over him, “because the love of God, which is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given to us,”
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Letters 171
… ordination to us by our sons, Daniel the presbyter and Timothy the deacon, so continue to act at all times and send us, who will be anxious for them, as frequent accounts as possible of the progress of peace, in order that by regular intercourse we may feel that “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us
5:6
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.16.9
… But God commendeth His love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more, then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son; much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 9
Ver. 6–8 . “For while we were yet without strength, Christ in due time died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet pervadenture for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth His love towards us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 7.9
… For that before all times, and above all times, Thy only-begotten Son remaineth unchangeably co-eternal with Thee; and that of “His fulness” souls receive, that they may be blessed; and that by participation of the wisdom remaining in them they are renewed, that they may be wise, is there. But that “in due time Christ died for the ungodly,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 13.10
… We were not, therefore, before that grace merely anyhow sinners, but in such sins that we were enemies of God. But the same apostle calls us above several times by two appellations, viz . sinners and enemies of God,—one as if the most mild, the other plainly the most harsh,—saying, “For if when we were yet weak, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Patience 17
… And therefore even when it does aid the just and seems to be rendered to his merits, not even then does it cease to be grace, because that which it aids it did itself bestow. With a view therefore to this grace, which precedes all good merits of man, not only was Christ put to death by the ungodly, but “died for the ungodly.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.23
… for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.” Who then could be so bold as to affirm, that without the regeneration of which the apostle speaks, infants could attain to eternal salvation, as if Christ died not for them? For “Christ died for the ungodly.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.43
… but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on Him that raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead; who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.” Then a little after he writes: “For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 22.2
2. But who was found good by the Lord, since “Christ died for the ungodly”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 92.5
… hear how thou wert loved when thou hadst nothing to be loved for, hear how thou wert loved when unsightly, deformed, before there was ought in thee which was meet to be loved. Thou wast first loved, that thou mightest be made meet to be loved. For Christ, as the Apostle says, “died for the ungodly.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 110.7
7. Nevertheless there are not wanting some who place us likewise before the angels; because, they say, Christ died for us and not for angels. But what else is such a notion than the desire to glory over our very impiety? For “Christ,” as the apostle says, “in due time died for the ungodly.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 50.31
… Because Christ with grace came to us. These words saith the Apostle: “But I live, now not I, but Christ liveth in me: but that in flesh I live, in faith I live of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me.” Acknowledge then sinners, that there would not need physician, if they were whole. For Christ died for the ungodly.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 111.4
… But of what use were the miracles, save that He might be feared? What too would fear profit, unless “the gracious and merciful Lord” gave “meat unto them that fear Him”? ( ver. 5 ); meat that doth not spoil, “bread that cometh down from heaven,” which He gave to no deservings of ours. For “Christ died for the ungodly.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 115.1
1. “Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto Thy Name give the praise” ( ver. 1 ). For that grace of the water that gushed from the rock (“now that rock was Christ” ), was not given on the score of works that had gone before, but of His mercy “that justifieth the ungodly.” For “Christ died for sinners,”
5:7
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus 4.28
… in keeping with the character of the Jews, might be made by some of that nation, but certainly not by the Christians, who have been taught that “God commendeth His love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us;” and although “scarcely for a righteous man will one die, yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 20
… She was both foolish, and of an evil tongue; and yet notwithstanding, though so many were her blemishes, yet did He give Himself up for her in her deformity, as for one in the bloom of youth, as for one dearly be loved, as for one of wonderful beauty. And it was in admiration of this that Paul said, “For scarcely for a righteous man will one die (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Colossians 2
… For this is not the only marvel, that we are counted worthy of the kingdom; but it should also be added who we are that are so counted; for it is not unimportant. And he doth this in the Epistle to the Romans, saying, “For scarcely for a righteous man will one die, but peradventure for the good man some one would even dare to die.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 27
… Marvel not that I am to be lifted up that ye may be saved, for this seemeth good to the Father, and He hath so loved you as to give His Son for slaves, and ungrateful slaves. Yet a man would not do this even for a friend, nor readily even for a righteous man; as Paul has declared when he said, “Scarcely for a righteous man will one die.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 121
(7) What is the meaning of Rom. v. 7 ?
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Sermons 85
… For, although that Love, wherewith the Lord has redeemed us, cannot be equalled by any man’s kindness, because it is one thing that a man who is doomed to die one day should die for a righteous man, and another that One Who is free from the debt of sin should lay down His life for the wicked
5:8
Origen † AD 254 Origen Against Celsus 4.28
… Certain other statements, in keeping with the character of the Jews, might be made by some of that nation, but certainly not by the Christians, who have been taught that “God commendeth His love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us;”
St Cyprian of Carthage † AD 258 The Epistles of Cyprian 51.18
… And if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Supporter: and He is the propitiation for our sins.” And Paul also, the apostle, in his epistle, has written, “If, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us; much more, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 8
What then is meant by “became subject”? What by “delivered him up for us all”? It is meant that the Son has it of the Father that He works in goodness on behalf of men. But you must hear too the words, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law;” and “while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 12
You see then the gain to be got from the former husband! And he does not say when we were in the Law, so in every passage shrinking from giving a handle to heretics;
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 20
… And it was in admiration of this that Paul said, “For scarcely for a righteous man will one die ( Rom. v. 7 .); and again, “in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Confessions 10.43
… else should I utterly despair. For numerous and great are my infirmities, yea, numerous and great are they; but Thy medicine is greater. We might think that Thy Word was removed from union with man, and despair of ourselves had He not been “made flesh and dwelt among us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 4.1
… “But God commendeth,” he says, “His love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son; much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 13.16
… Then the apostle adds, “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 76
… God, we find that we are ourselves wretched, and confess the justice of His judgment by which we are made wretched, of which the apostle says, “The judgment was by one to condemnation;” and praise the greatness of His love, of which the same preacher of grace says, “God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Catechising of the Uninstructed 4
7. Moreover, what greater reason is apparent for the advent of the Lord than that God might show His love in us, commending it powerfully, inasmuch as “while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Concerning the Nature of Good, Against the Manichæans 31
… "But God commendeth His love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us; much more now being justified in His blood we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more being reconciled we shall be saved in His life."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 4.8
… And not only so, but glorying also in God through Jesus Christ our Lord, by whom also we have now received reconciliation.” Then he subjoins, “Therefore, as by one man sin entered into this world, and death by sin, and so passed upon all men, for in him all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 110.6
… but we were reconciled unto Him who already loved us, but with whom we were at enmity because of our sin. Whether I say the truth on this, let the apostle testify, when he says: “God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Ten Homilies on the First Epistle of John 9.9
… How shall we become lovely? By loving Him who is always lovely. As the love increases in thee, so the loveliness increases: for love is itself the beauty of the soul. “Let us love, because He first loved us.” Hear the apostle Paul: “But God showed His love in us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 7.10
… For if “while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us, how much more being now justified shall we be kept whole from wrath through Him.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 68.34
34. “Command, O God, Thy Virtue” ( ver. 28 ). For one is our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we in Him, of whom we read that He is “the Virtue of God and the Wisdom of God.” But how doth God command His Christ, save while He commendeth Him? For “God commendeth His love in us, in that while yet we were sinners, for us Christ died.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 86.2
… God then bows down His ear unto us. For He is above, we below: He in a high place, we in a lowly one, yet not deserted. “For while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. For scarcely for a just man will one die: yet for a good man peradventure one would even dare to die:”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.2
… 14 ). We understand that there is no more speedy, no more sure, no shorter, no higher way of the testimonies of God than Christ, “in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.” Thence he saith that he hath had as great delight in this way, as in all riches. Those are the testimonies, by which He deigneth to prove unto us how much He loveth us.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 147.4
4. Who is “our God,” that praise should be pleasant to Him? He maketh Himself sweet to us, He commendeth Himself to us; thanks to His condescension.…“But God commendeth His love to us”…“in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”
5:9
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 9
Ver. 9, 10 . “Much more then, being now justified by His Blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 13.14
… What, except the righteousness of Jesus Christ? And how was he conquered? Because, when he found in Him nothing worthy of death, yet he slew Him. And certainly it is just, that we whom he held as debtors, should be dismissed free by believing in Him whom he slew without any debt. In this way it is that we are said to be justified in the blood of Christ.
5:10
St Hilary of Poitiers † AD 367 De Trinitate or On the Trinity 6.44
44. And the persecutor, who was converted to be an Apostle and a chosen vessel, delivers the very same message. What discourse is there of his which does not presuppose the confession of the Son? What Epistle of his that does not begin with a confession of that mysterious truth? When he says, We were reconciled to God by the death of His Son
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Against Marcionists and Manichæans 2
… The cross has broken our bond, it has made the prison of death ineffectual, it is the demonstration of the love of God. “For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son, that every one who believes in Him should not perish.” And again Paul says “If being enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom 39
Neither account the journey to be difficult. “For if when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 3
… Because it is not all as one, to promise a kingdom and to be crucified. For the former neither had danger nor brought shame; but the latter, all these. Moreover, he proves the former from the latter: for having said, ( Rom. viii. 32 .) “He that spared not His own Son,” he adds, “How shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?” And again, (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 2 Thessalonians 2
… As also elsewhere in an Epistle he has said, “For if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by His life.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 60
… He proveth one from the other; by giving His mortal life (He proveth) that He giveth life immortal. As Paul also saith, “If when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more being reconciled we shall be saved.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 32
… cxlvi. 9 ) and the poor. God wishes to be called from her. “The Lord is pitiful and merciful, long-suffering, and of great mercy” ( Ps. cxlv. 8 ), and true. The mercy of God is over all the earth. She hath saved the race of mankind (see Ps. cxlv. 9 ): For unless she had pitied us, all things would have perished. “When we were enemies” (see
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 33
… Wherefore the apostle says: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Our Lord’s Sermon on the Mount 1.11
… of those whom He resists, for “God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace to the humble;” and “pride is the beginning of all sin, but the beginning of man’s pride is to become apostate from God;” and the apostle says, “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 5.17
… Who spared not His Only Son, but delivered Him up for us all.” “For if, when we were enemies, Christ died for us; much more being reconciled shall we be saved from wrath through Him.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 72.1
… For Salomon is interpreted peace-maker: and on this account such a word to Him most truly and excellently doth apply, through Whom, the Mediator, having received remission of sins, we that were enemies are reconciled to God. For “when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son.”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 3
Eran. —We have learnt this from the divine Scripture. The divine John exclaims “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son,” and the divine Paul, “For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more being reconciled we shall be saved by His life.”
5:11
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 4.4
4. Let us not then be out of heart for the present evils; for if thou hast any sins
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies on the Statues to the People of Antioch 6.9
… The blessed Job is a proof of this, who received so many intolerable wounds through the devil’s plotting against him uselessly, vainly, and without cause. Yet, nevertheless, because he bore them courageously, and gave thanks to God who permitted them, he was invested with a perfect
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 7
… “By what law? of works? Nay, but by the law of faith.” See he calls the faith also a law delighting to keep to the names, and so allay the seeming novelty. But what is the “law of faith?” It is, being saved by grace. Here he shows God’s power, in that He has not only saved, but has even justified, and led them to boasting,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 9
Ver. 11 . “And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by Whom we have now received the atonement.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 1
Do you observe how that nothing is done without Christ? Nothing without the Father? The one hath predestinated, the other hath brought us near. And these words he adds by way of heightening the things which have been done, in the same way as he says also elsewhere, “And not only so, but we also rejoice in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ.” (
5:12
St Gregory Thaumaturgus † AD 270 Twelve Topics on the Faith 12
… He said, not as holding before us any contest proper only to a God, but as showing our own flesh in its capacity to overcome suffering, and death, and corruption, in order that, as sin entered into the world by flesh, and death came to reign by sin over all men, the sin in the flesh might also be condemned through the selfsame flesh in the likeness thereof;
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 30
… but also over the righteous, because they refused to consent to it, and rather withstood it, by putting away from themselves the vices and concupiscence of lusts,—men like those who have arisen at times from Abel on to Zacharias; —death thus always passing, up to the time of Moses , upon those after that similitude.
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 11
… It is truly a subject of joy, that we can see the signs of victory against death, even our own incorruptibility, through the body of the Lord. For since He rose gloriously, it is clear that the resurrection of all of us will take place; and since His body remained without corruption, there can be no doubt regarding our incorruption . For as by one man
St Basil the Great † AD 379 The Letters 261
… It follows that He took our flesh with its natural afflictions, but “did no sin.” Just as the death which is in the flesh, transmitted to us through Adam, was swallowed up by the Godhead, so was the sin taken away by the righteousness which is in Christ Jesus,
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 13.28
… He stretched forth human hands, who by His spiritual hands had established the heaven; and they were fastened with nails, that His manhood, which here the sins of men, having been nailed to the tree, and having died, sin might die with it, and we might rise again in righteousness. For since by one man came death, by One Man came also life
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Decease of His Brother Satyrus 2.6
… For death is alike to all, without difference for the poor, without exception for the rich. And so although through the sin of one alone, yet it passed upon all;
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 7
Ver. 21 . “But now the righteousness of God without the Law is manifested.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on Ephesians 24
… vi. 12 .); and again, “In intolerable corruption” ( Ex. xviii. 18 .); and again, “Men corrupted in mind.” ( 2 Tim. iii. 8 .) Our body is corruptible, but our soul is incorruptible. Oh then, let us not make that corruptible also. This, the corruption of the body, was the work of former sin;
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 67
… For when God saith, “I will glorify,” He showeth the manner of the glorifying. What is it? That one should be cast down. But what is, “the judgment of this world”? It is as though He said, “there shall be a tribunal and a retribution.” How and in what way? “He slew the first man, having found him guilty of sin, (for ‘by sin death entered’—
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 98.10
… the sacrament will avail for his protection against adverse powers, and will avail so much on his behalf, that if before he arrives at the use of reason he depart from this life, he is delivered by Christian help, namely, by the love of the Church commending him through this sacrament unto God, from that condemnation which by one man entered into the world.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 164
… For if the souls of all men are derived from that one which the breath of God gave to the first man, by whom “sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 14.11
… He was not on this account less culpable, but sinned with his eyes open. And so the apostle does not say, “He did not sin,” but “He was not deceived.” For he shows that he sinned when he says, “By one man sin entered into the world,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 City of God 16.27
… nor has the covenant of God been broken by him, but by his parents, who have not taken care to circumcise him. But even the infants, not personally in their own life, but according to the common origin of the human race, have all broken God’s covenant in that one in whom all have sinned.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On the Holy Trinity 4.12
… For to us, too, that we may adore the lowly Christ, the “heavens have declared the glory of God, when their sound went into all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.” A way was made for us to death through sin in Adam. For, “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 26
… And thus “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 45
However, even in that one sin, which “by one man entered into the world, and so passed upon all men,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 22.78
… Thus we are informed by the sure word of God of Adam’s sin; and Scripture truly declares that in him all die, and that by him sin entered into the world, and death by sin.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 24
… By the old man the apostle simply means the old life, which is a life in sin, and is after the manner of Adam, of whom it is said, "By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, in that all have sinned."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.8
… In these words, addressed to the Corinthians: “By man came death, and by man came also the resurrection of the dead; for as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive,” —what other meaning is indeed conveyed than in the verse in which he says to the Romans, “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.9
You tell me in your letter, that they endeavour to twist into some new sense the passage of the apostle, in which he says: “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.10
… It is entirely on this account, and for no other reason, that the apostle says: “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so passed upon all men; in which all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.11
… “In thy seed shall all nations be blessed.” I do not believe that any one can find it anywhere stated in the Holy Scriptures, that a man has ever sinned or still sins “in the devil,” although all wicked and impious men “imitate” him. The apostle, however, has declared concerning the first man, that “in him all have sinned;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 3.1
… and therein I found, on coming to the passage where the apostle says, “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so it passed upon all men,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 3.8
And therefore, if there is an ambiguity in the apostle’s words when he says, “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so it passed upon all men;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 3.14
… Moreover, in the sacred books of the canon, the authority of this doctrine is vigorously asserted in the clearest and fullest way. The apostle exclaims: “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so it passed upon all men, in which all have sinned.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 3.19
What the apostle says: “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so it passed upon all men, in which all have sinned;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 47
… and therefore, when, the sin being healed, it is written there, the prescriptions of the law are done “ by nature, ”—not that by nature grace is denied, but rather by grace nature is repaired. For “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men; in which all have sinned;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Nature and Grace 9
… He would therefore absolve him, and, in spite of the Lord’s sentence, open to him the kingdom of heaven. The apostle, however, does not absolve him, when he says: “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; by which death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Nature and Grace 46
… that he would only faithfully and obediently hear that which is written there: “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men; in which all have sinned;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Nature and Grace 48
… passage, “All have sinned,” and he met their statement founded on this with the remark that “the apostle was manifestly speaking of the then existing generation, that is, the Jews and the Gentiles;” but surely the passage which I have quoted, “By one man sin entered the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men; in which all have sinned,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 39
… us.” Now it follows from the whole of this, that in so far as we are born of God we abide in Him who appeared to take away sins, that is, in Christ, and sin not,—which is simply that “the inward man is renewed day by day;” but in so far as we are born of that man “through whom sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness chapter44
… “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, in which all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 1.55
… we must commence another treatise, as the Lord shall enable us, on the subject of sin also, which by one man has entered into the world, along with death, and so has passed upon all men,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 2.34
… From the moment, then, when “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all sinned,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.3
… For, after saying that men at their birth contract original sin, I at once introduced the apostle’s words: “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for in him all men sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.8
… for “of whom a man is overcome,” as the Scripture says, “of the same is he brought in bondage;” and no one except by the grace of the great Liberator is loosed from the chain of this bondage, from which no man living is free. For “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for in him all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.15
… “But as there cannot be offspring without the sexes, so there cannot be sin without the will.” Yes, indeed, such is the truth. For even as “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; so also has death passed through to all men, for in him all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.20
… Now whatever may be the particular application of these words, they are spoken of mankind. How, then, is the malice of every man inbred, and his seed cursed from the beginning, unless it be in respect of the fact, that “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for in him all have sinned”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.24
… and yet there is by no means any falsehood uttered here by God or Holy Scripture. The fact is, the covenant of God which he then broke was not this which commanded circumcision, but that which forbade the tree; when “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for in him all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.37
… the fruit, too, of matrimony is good, as being the very human being which is thus born; sin, however, is an evil with which every man is born. Now it was God who made and still makes man; but “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for in him all sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.42
… The evil in question, therefore, does not accrue to marriage from its own institution, which was blessed; but entirely from the circumstance that sin entered into the world by one man, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for in him all sinned.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.45
… nor parents, so far as they are parents, who are united together properly and lawfully for the procreation of children; but he says, “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men for in him all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.47
… and so death passed upon all men, for in him all sinned.” “Through the offence of one many are dead.” “The judgment was from one to condemnation.” “By one man’s offence death reigned by one.” “By the offence of one, Judgment came upon all men to condemnation.” “By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.48
… Well, then, if evil, which was absolutely nowhere previously, could arise in a work of God, why could not evil, which had by this time found an existence somewhere, pervade the work of God; especially when the apostle uses the very expression in the passage, “And so death passed upon all men”?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.50
… nor is it in the books of Manichæus that we read how “the Son of man come to seek and to save that which was lost,” or how “by one man sin entered into the world,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Soul and its Origin 1.28
… For just as the controversialist who maintains the propagation of souls, ought not, on the one hand, to press this man too hard, because the Scripture says concerning the first man, “In whom all have sinned”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Soul and its Origin 2.20
… For just as the one party seems to be assisted by the expres sion, “of one blood,” instead of the phrase, “of one man,” so the other side evidently gets countenance from the statement being so plainly written, “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for in him all sinned,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 4.7
But these speak thus who wish to wrest men from the apostle’s words into their own thought. For where the apostle says, “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so passed upon all men,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 4.24
… Does he say that the condition of death passed upon men from Adam without the contagion of sin? For it is not on account of avoiding the death of the body, but on account of the sin which entered by one man into the world,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Predestination of the Saints 2.30
… but that, not being regenerated, they pass into the second death. Because that which is written, “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 65.4
… As far as concerns them personally, I see that they are without fault, I am seeking for their guiltiness. Whence is it? I listen to the Apostle, “By one man sin entered into the world. By one man,” he says, “sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men by him in whom all sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 30.5
… This circumcision, then, signified the removal of carnal lusts from the heart. Therefore not without cause was it given, and ordered to be made in that member; since by that member the creature of mortal kind is procreated. By one man came death, just as by one man the resurrection of the dead; and by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 49.12
… for one thing may be signified by different figures. When a man is born, he is born already in a state of death; for he inherits sin from Adam. Hence the apostle says: “By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so that passed upon all men, wherein all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 35.14
… Not that there was sin, I say not in the Word of God, but not even in that Holy Soul and Mind of a Man, which the Word and Wisdom of God had so joined to Himself as to be One Person. Nay, nor even in His very Body was any sin, but the likeness of sinful flesh there was in the Lord; because death is not but by sin,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 51.10
… He took upon Him our punishment, and so looseth our guilt. With reason then, “In Adam all die, but in Christ shall all be made alive.” For, “Through one man,” saith the Apostle, “sin hath entered into this world, and through sin death, and so hath passed unto all men, in that all have sinned.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 90.9
… and old men have often been found to be wonderfully vigorous even beyond eighty years. It is therefore better to search for some spiritual meaning in these numbers. For the anger of God is not greater on the sins of Adam (through whom alone “sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men”),
St John of Damascus † AD 749 An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 3.27
Since our Lord Jesus Christ was without sin ( for He committed no sin, He Who took away the sin of the world, nor was there any deceit found in His mouth ) He was not subject to death, since death came into the world through sin
5:13
Origen † AD 254 Origen's Commentary on the Gospel of John 2.9
… The Apostle says: “Without the law sin was dead,” and adds, “But when the commandment came sin revived,” and so teaches generally about sin that it has no power before the law and the commandment (but the Logos is, in a sense, law and commandment), and there would be no sin were there no law, for,
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 5
… See how much greater is the necessity which he lays upon the Jews of a speedy recourse to grace! For in that they said, they needed not grace, being justified by the Law, he shows that they need it more than the Gentiles, considering they are liable to be punished more. Then he adds another reason again, and so farther contends for what has been said.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10
Ver. 13 . “For until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed where there is no law.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.12
Observe also what follows. Having said, “In which all have sinned,” he at once added, “For until the law, sin was in the world.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 24
… In which class do we place that which is thus spoken of: “The law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression?” and again thus: “Until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law?”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.46
But what else is meant even by the apostle’s subsequent words? For after he had said the above, he added, “For until the law sin was in the world,”
5:14
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.18.7
… Those, therefore, who assert that He appeared putatively, and was neither born in the flesh nor truly made man, are as yet under the old condemnation, holding out patronage to sin; for, by their showing, death has not been vanquished, which “reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression.”
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.22.3
… Hence also was Adam himself termed by Paul “the figure of Him that was to come,”
St Hippolytus † AD 235 The Refutation of All Heresies 7.13
… “Sin, then, reigned from Adam unto Moses,”
St Gregory Thaumaturgus † AD 270 Four Homilies 2
… But the man being deceived by the devil, and having become a transgressor of the divine commandment, was made subject to the doom of death. Whence, also, those born of him were involved in their father’s liability in virtue of their succession, and had the reckoning of condemnation required of them. “For death reigned from Adam to Moses.”
Archelaus † fl. AD 278 The Acts of the Disputation with the Heresiarch Manes 29
… and if the case goes otherwise, I shall come under the condemnation of the judges, that is to say, I shall have to bear the shame of defeat. You say, then, that the law is a ministration of death, and you admit that “death, the prince of this world, reigned from Adam even to Moses;”
St Methodius † AD 311 The Banquet of the Ten Virgins; or Concerning Chastity 4.2
… Whence, also, they say that Pharaoh was a type of the devil in Egypt, since he mercilessly commanded the males to be cast into the river, but the females to be preserved alive. For the devil, ruling
Aphrahat † AD 346 Aphrahat: Select Demonstrations 22.1
… They know that by the sentence of judgment death has held sway, because Adam transgressed the commandment; as the Apostle said:— Death ruled from Adam unto Moses even over those who sinned not, so that also upon all the children of Adam it passed ,
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 On the Incarnation of the Word 3
… and from thenceforth no longer remained as they were made, but were being corrupted according to their devices; and death had the mastery over them as king
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Illud Omnia, &c. (On Luke x. 22.) 2
For whereas man sinned, and is fallen, and by his fall all things are in confusion: death prevailed from Adam to Moses (cf.
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 1.13
… And the Law was spoken by Angels, and perfected no one , needing the visitation of the Word, as Paul hath said; but that visitation has perfected the work of the Father. And then, from Adam unto Moses death reigned
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) 3.26
… and for this reason:—Many for instance have been made holy and clean from all sin; nay, Jeremiah was hallowed even from the womb, and John, while yet in the womb, leapt for joy at the voice of Mary Bearer of God ; nevertheless ‘death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression
St Athanasius of Alexandria † AD 373 Festal and Personal Letters of Athanasius 5
… For of old time, ‘death reigned from Adam to Moses;’ but now the divine voice hath said, ‘To-day shalt thou be with Me in Paradise.’ And the saints, being sensible of this, said, ‘Except the Lord had helped me, my soul had almost dwelt in hell.
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 14
… but because divine things are prefigured by small and human things, it is obvious that we must not therefore conclude the divine nature to be small. The type is an exhibition of things expected, and gives an imitative anticipation of the future. So Adam was a type of “Him that was to come.”
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 15.31
… Nevertheless, death reigned from Adam till Moses
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans pref
… ix. in Gen. c. i. v. 28, where he speaks of the loss of command over the creation, as a penalty of the Fall. And finally a passage from the homily before quoted (as ad Neophytos ), in which he speaks of our Lord finding us “bound by a hereditary debt;” and one in Hom. x. of this Commentary, viz. that on
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on 1 Timothy 9
… for the sex is weak and fickle, and he is speaking of the sex collectively. For he says not Eve, but “the woman,” which is the common name of the whole sex, not her proper name. Was then the whole sex included in the transgression for her fault? As he said of Adam, “After the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of Him that was to come” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 4
… No, but concerning this. Therefore he added “whereof we speak,” that he might not allow the mind to wander away in search of some other. How then does he call it “the world to come”? Exactly as he also says in another place, “Who is the figure of him that was to come,” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 39.4
… The reason, of course, is that under Moses—that is under the old Law—all men were bound by the sentence passed on Adam’s sin, and when they descended into hell were rightly accompanied with tears. For, as the apostle says, “death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 60.3
… Before Thy coming was there any being more miserable than man who cowering at the dread prospect of eternal death did but receive life that he might perish! For “death reigned from Adam to Moses even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression.”
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 1.22
22. But it is now time for us to raise the standard of Joshua’s chastity. It is written that Moses had a wife. Now Moses is interpreted both by our Lord and by the Apostle to mean the law: “They have Moses and the prophets.” And
St Jerome † AD 420 Against Jovinianus 2.10
… the saints as sinners, the last Adam will date from the time when Christ was born of a Virgin, and your argument from the two Adams will not benefit your sheep and goats, because we have proved that in the first Adam there were both sheep and goats, and that of those who were in one and the same man, some stood on the right hand of God, others on the left:
St Jerome † AD 420 Against the Pelagians 2
Ps. lviii. 3 . Sinners are estranged from the womb; that is, either, as St. Paul says (
St Jerome † AD 420 Against the Pelagians 3.6
A. You ask me! The Gospel trumpet will reply, the teacher of the Gentiles, the golden vessel shining throughout the world:
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 12.8
… "Except a man eat my flesh and drink my blood, he has no life in him." The whole narrative of Genesis, in the most minute details, is a prophecy of Christ and of the Church with reference either to the good Christians or to the bad. There is a significance in the words of the apostle when he calls Adam "the figure of Him that was to come;"
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.13
“Nevertheless,” says he, “death reigned from Adam even unto Moses,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 3.9
To me, however, no doubt presents itself about the whole of this passage, in which the apostle speaks of the condemnation of many through the sin of one, and the justification of many through the righteousness of One, except as to the words, “Adam is the figure of Him that was to come.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 2.29
Death indeed reigned from Adam until Moses,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.46
… “But sin,” adds he, “was not imputed when there was no law.” It existed then, but was not imputed, for it was not set forth so that it might be imputed. It is on the same principle, indeed, that he says in another passage: “By the law is the knowledge of sin.” “Nevertheless,” says he, “death reigned from Adam to Moses;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 9.10
… when Christ is dead, the spear pierces His side, that the mysteries may flow forth whereby the Church is formed. Is it not evident to every man that in those things then done, things to come were foreshadowed, since the apostle says that Adam himself was the figure of Him that was to come? “Who is,” saith he, “the figure of Him that was to come.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 6.2
… Through this entire season, when men lived according to the body, “death reigned,” as the Apostle saith, “even over those that had not sinned.” Now it reigned “after the similitude of Adam’s transgression,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 41.9
… be “the earth given into the hands of the wicked,” be the flesh left to the hands of persecutors, let them on wood suspend it, with nails transfix it, with a spear pierce it. “Shall He that sleepeth, not add this, that He rise up again?” Where fore slept He? Because “Adam is the figure of Him that was to come.”
5:15
St Gregory of Nyssa † AD 395 The Great Catechism 16
… For He Who reunited to His own proper body the soul that had been assumed by Himself, by virtue of that power which had mingled with both of these component elements at their first framing, then, upon a more general scale as it were
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10
… How, and in what way? He enquires whence death came in, and how it prevailed. How then did death come in and prevail? “Through the sin of one.” But what means, “for that all have sinned?” This; he having once fallen, even they that had not eaten of the tree did from him, all of them, become mortal.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 4
… “He who spared not His Own Son,” he says, “but delivered Him up for us all.” ( Rom. viii. 32 .) Why? He did not owe us this, but has done it of grace. And again in the Epistle to the Romans he says, “Much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace which is by one man Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.14
“But,” says he, “not as the offence so also is the free gift. For if, through the offence of one, many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by One Man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.46
… this is the figure. But this figure is not conformable in every respect; accordingly the apostle, following up the same idea, added, “But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead; much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 3
… And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift; for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ”
5:16
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10
Ver. 16 . “And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift. For the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 50
With this difference: the first man brought one sin into the world, but this man took away not only that one sin, but all that He found added to it. Hence the apostle says: “And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offenses unto justification.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 76
… This is our first alms, which we give to ourselves when, through the mercy of a pitying God, we find that we are ourselves wretched, and confess the justice of His judgment by which we are made wretched, of which the apostle says, “The judgment was by one to condemnation;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.15
… But mark what follows: “And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift; for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the grace is of many offences unto justification.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.21
It may therefore be correctly affirmed, that such infants as quit the body without being baptized will be involved in the mildest condemnation of all. That person, therefore, greatly deceives both himself and others, who teaches that they will not be involved in condemnation; whereas the apostle says: “Judgment from one offence to condemnation,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Soul and its Origin 1.14
… let him see which he will choose of two alternatives: Either to say that even the souls of dying infants who depart hence without the washing of regeneration, and for whom no sacrifice of the Lord’s body is offered, are absolved from the bond of original sin—although the apostle teaches that “from one all go into condemnation,”
5:17
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.16.9
9. Concurring with these statements, Paul, speaking to the Romans, declares: “Much more they who receive abundance of grace and righteousness for [eternal] life, shall reign by one, Christ Jesus.”
St Basil the Great † AD 379 De Spiritu Sancto 14
… For the blood of the sheep is a type of the blood of Christ; and the firstborn, a type of the first-formed. And inasmuch as the first-formed of necessity exists in us, and, in sequence of succession, is transmitted till the end, it follows that “in Adam” we “all die,” and that “death reigned”
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 13.2
2. And wonder not that the whole world was ransomed; for it was no mere man, but the only-begotten Son of God, who died on its behalf. Moreover one man’s sin, even Adam’s, had power to bring death to the world; but if by the trespass of the one death reigned over the world, how shall not life much rather reign by the righteousness of the One
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10
Ver. 17 . “For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one, much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift and (so Field with most mss. ) of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 16
… For when he was discussing how by Christ being justified all the rest enjoyed that righteousness, he brought in Adam’s case, saying, “For if by one man’s offence death reigned, much more they which receive abundance of grace shall reign in life.” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.17
“For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of righteousness shall reign in life by one, even Jesus Christ.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.46
… “For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one, much more they which receive abundance of grace and righteousness shall reign in life by One, Jesus Christ. Therefore, by the offence of one upon all men to condemnation; so by the righteousness of one upon all men unto justification of life.”
5:18
St Barnabas † AD 61 The Epistle of Barnabas 1
… I then, not as your teacher, but as one of yourselves, will set forth a few things by which in present circumstances ye may be rendered the more joyful.
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10
Ver. 18 . “Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of One the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 166.21
… Now he that is not made alive in Christ must necessarily remain under the condemnation, of which the apostle says, that “by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 51
But what he says a little after, “Therefore, as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.18
“Therefore as by the offence of one upon all men to condemnation, even so by the justification of One upon all men unto justification of life.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.19
Now if it is imitation only that makes men sinners through Adam, why does not imitation likewise alone make men righteous through Christ? “For,” he says, “as by the offence of one upon all men to condemnation; even so by the justification of one upon all men unto justification of life.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.21
… That person, therefore, greatly deceives both himself and others, who teaches that they will not be involved in condemnation; whereas the apostle says: “Judgment from one offence to condemnation,” and again a little after: “By the offence of one upon all persons to condemnation.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.55
… so, out of these, none at all who are regenerated by the will of the Spirit are endowed with life except in Christ, in whom all are justified. Because as through one all to condemnation, so through One all to justification.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 2.42
Our opinions on this point are strictly in unison with the apostle’s himself, who said, “From one all to condemnation,” and “from one all to justification of life.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Nature and Grace 48
… He adduces also this passage, whence he would prove that we ought not to understand all without exception, when “all” is used:—“As by the offence of one,” he says, “upon all men to condemnation, even so by the righteousness of One, upon all men unto justification of life.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Soul and its Origin 2.17
… of Christ before being washed in the baptism of Christ, He says in another passage, “He that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.” And so far from promising the abolition of original sin to any one who has not been regenerated in the laver of Christian faith, the apostle exclaims, “By the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Soul and its Origin 4.16
… How much better, then, is it, that I should not separately dispute and affirm about the soul, what I am ignorant of; but simply hold what I see the apostle has most plainly taught us: That owing to one man all pass into condemnation who are born of Adam
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 4.8
… For as there was one man for death on account of sin, so there is one man for life on account of righteousness; because “as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive;” and “as by the sin of one upon all men to condemnation, so also by the righteousness of one upon all men unto justification of life.”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 3
… “Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Letters 59
… And accordingly, the Apostle says: “As by one man’s sin (judgment passed) upon all to condemnation, so also by one man’s righteousness (it) passed upon all to justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one man’s obedience shall many be made righteous
5:19
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.18.7
… who had been drawn by sin into bondage, but was held by death, so that sin should be destroyed by man, and man should go forth from death. For as by the disobedience of the one man who was originally moulded from virgin soil, the many were made sinners,
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.21.10
10. For as by one man’s disobedience sin entered, and death obtained [a place] through sin; so also by the obedience of one man, righteousness having been introduced, shall cause life to fructify in those persons who in times past were dead.
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.8
109. Who is sore humbled, but Christ, Who came to free all through His obedience? “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Exposition of the Christian Faith 5.12
… as He Himself says: “Lo I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.” But it is better to be with Christ: “For to depart and be with Christ is far better.” Though we are under sin in this world, Christ is with us, that “by the obedience of one man many may be made just.”
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 Selections from the Letters of St. Ambrose sermon-against-auxentius-on-th.35
35. What could show greater obedience than that we should follow Christ’s example, “Who, being found in fashion as a man, humbled Himself and became obedient even unto death?” Accordingly He has freed all through His obedience. “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of One shall many be made righteous.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10
Ver. 19 . “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of One shall many be made righteous.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 130.26
… this the Mediator has given us an example, inasmuch as, after He had said, “Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me,” transforming the human will which was in Him through His incarnation, He immediately added, “Nevertheless, O Father, not as I will but as Thou wilt.” Wherefore, not without reason are many made righteous by the obedience of One.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Acts or Disputation Against Fortunatus the Manichaean 2
… "Let no one seduce you;" "Every creature that has been made by God is good." The same apostle whom you also have cited says: "As through the disobedience of the one the many were constituted sinners; so also through the obedience of the one the many are constituted righteous."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.19
… For if any could be generated in the flesh, yet not by Adam; and if in like manner any could be generated in the Spirit, and not by Christ; clearly “ all ” could not be spoken of either in the one class or in the other. But these “ all ” the apostle afterwards describes as “ many ;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Marriage and Concupiscence 2.46
… Indeed, the apostle afterwards designates as many those whom he had previously described as all , meaning the self-same persons by the two different terms. “For,” says he, “as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 66
… He who disowns Christ as man, finds no reconciliation to God by the Mediator. For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. He that denies Christ as man is not justified: for as by the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners; so also by the obedience of one man shall many be made righteous.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 99.1
… as I hear, I judge.” For Adam, by whose disobedience, as that of one man, many were made sinners, did not judge as he heard; for he prevaricated what he heard, and of his own self did the evil that he did; for he did not the will of God, but his own: while this latter, by whose obedience, as that also of one man, many are made righteous,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 62.4
… For this reason therefore Cain builded a city where there was not a city. For from mortality and from naughtiness every one setteth out, in order that he may be made good hereafter. “For as by the disobedience of one man many were made sinners, so by the obedience of One Man many shall be made just.”
Theodoret of Cyrus † AD 458 Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus 1
“For as by the disobedience of the one man who was first formed from rude earth the many were made sinners
5:20
Mathetes † fl. AD 130 Epistle to Diognetus 9
… now revealed the Saviour who is able to save even those things which it was [formerly] impossible to save, by both these facts He desired to lead us to trust in His kindness, to esteem Him our Nourisher, Father, Teacher, Counsellor, Healer, our Wisdom, Light, Honour, Glory, Power, and Life, so that we should not be anxious concerning clothing and food.
St Irenaeus of Lyons † AD 202 Against Heresies 3.23.8
… “In Adam we all die;” ignorant, however, that “where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Resurrection of the Flesh 34
… Then must the devil be understood to be stronger for injuring man, ruining him wholly? and must God have the character of comparative weakness, since He does not relieve and help man in his entire state? The apostle, however, suggests that “where sin abounded, there has grace much more abounded.”
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Resurrection of the Flesh 47
… so that, just as death had swallowed it up in its strength, it also, after this mortal was swallowed up of immortality, may hear the challenge pronounced against it: “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” For in this way “grace shall there much more abound, where sin once abounded.”
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 12.15
… By the very same weapons, therefore, wherewith the Devil used to vanquish us, have we been saved. The Lord took on Him from us our likeness, that He might save man’s nature: He took our likeness, that He might give greater grace to that which lacked; that sinful humanity might become partaker of God. For where sin abounded, grace did much more abound
St Cyril of Jerusalem † AD 386 The Catechetical Lectures of S. Cyril 13.31
… Fear not the flaming sword; it shrinks from its Lord . O mighty and ineffable grace! The faithful Abraham had not yet entered, but the robber enters ! Moses and the Prophets had not yet entered, and the robber enters though a breaker of the law. Paul also wondered at this before thee, saying, Where sin abounded, there grace did much more abound
St Gregory of Nazianzus † AD 389 Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen 38
… and that as we died in Adam, so we might live in Christ, being born with Christ and crucified with Him and buried with Him and rising with Him. For I must undergo the beautiful conversion, and as the painful succeeded the more blissful, so must the more blissful come out of the painful. For where sin abounded Grace did much more abound;
St Ambrose of Milan † AD 397 On the Holy Spirit 3.11
… For Mary worshipped Christ, and therefore is appointed to be the messenger of the Resurrection to the apostles, loosening the hereditary bond, and the huge offence of womankind. For this the Lord wrought mystically, “that where sin had exceedingly abounded, grace might more exceedingly abound.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 6
For whereas Paul said, “where sin abounded grace did much more abound” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10
Ver. 20 . “Moreover the Law entered: that the offence might abound.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 12
Even before this he had been saying, that “the motions of sins, which were by the Law did work in our members” ( ver. 5 ): and, “sin shall have no dominion over you, for ye are not under the Law.” ( vi. 14 .) And that “where no law is, there is no transgression.” ( iv. 15 .) And, “but the Law came in, that the offence might abound” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 27
… Thus Christ Himself uses it, when He saith, “For judgement I am come into this world; that they which see not may see, and that they which see may be made blind.” ( John ix. 39 .) So likewise Paul in another place, when discoursing of the law, he writes, “And the Law came in beside, that the trespass might abound.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Gospel of St. John 56
… And again Paul, “Because that which may be known of God is manifested in them, that they may be without excuse” ( Rom. i. 19, 20 ); yet He showed it not unto them for this, that they might be deprived of excuse, but that they might obtain excuse. And again in another place, “The Law entered, that the offense might abound” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 1
[1.] Truly , “where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” (
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews 17
… and He must not die a second time, all would have been useless. But since later, there were many transgressions, with reason He then appeared: which he expresses in another place also, “Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound. But now once in the end of the world, hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.” (
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 46.4
… Now, therefore, its guardian angels have forsaken it and the grace of Christ has been withdrawn. Josephus, himself a Jewish writer, asserts that at the Lord’s crucifixion there broke from the temple voices of heavenly powers, saying: “Let us depart hence.” These and other considerations show that where grace abounded there did sin much more abound.
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 69.1
… In the gospel he who envies another’s salvation is thus addressed: “Friend, is thine eye evil because I am good?” “God hath concluded them all in sin that he might have mercy upon all.” “When sin abounded grace did much more abound.”
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 77.12
… But let envy depart and censoriousness be silent. If the father of the house is good why should our eye be evil? The soul which fell among thieves has been carried home upon the shoulders of Christ. In our father’s house are many mansions. Where sin hath abounded, grace hath much more abounded.
St Jerome † AD 420 The Letters of St. Jerome 97.1
… “I sat down under his shadow with great delight and his fruit was sweet to my taste.” ) Now truly is Isaiah’s prophecy fulfilled: “In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the land of Egypt.” “Where sin hath abounded, grace doth much more abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 82.20
… God forbid.” “But sin, that it might appear sin, wrought death in me by that which is good; that sin, by the commandment, might become exceeding sinful.” As he says here, “that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful,” so elsewhere, “The law entered that the offence might abound; but where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Letters of St. Augustin 169.4
… But if, as is the fact, crowds of common people, possessing no great strength of intellect, run to the Physician in the exercise of faith, with the result of being healed by Christ and Him crucified, that “where sin has abounded, grace may much more abound,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 52
… so that just as real as is His death, so real is the remission of our sins; and just as real as is His resurrection, so real is our justification. He says: “What shall we say, then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?” For he had said previously, “But where sin, abounded, grace did much more abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Enchiridion 118
… and thus the effect produced by the knowledge of the commandment is this, that sin worketh in man all manner of concupiscence, and he is involved in the additional guilt of willful transgression, and that is fulfilled which is written: “The, law entered that the offense might abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 On Continence 7
… they live not under Grace, which gives through the Holy Spirit what is commanded through the Law: unto these the Law therefore entered, that in them the offense might abound. The prohibition in creased the lust, and made it unconquered:
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Of Holy Virginity 36
… All these, when they are converted unto Thee, easily grow meek, and are humbled before Thee, mindful of their own most unrighteous life, and of Thy most indulgent mercy, in that, “where sin hath abounded, grace hath abounded more.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 15.8
… She is not blinded by a spirit of controversy, but learns meekly from the apostle what is this law which we are not to be under; for "it was given," he says, "on account of transgression, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made." And again: "It entered, that the offence might abound; but where sin abounded, grace has much more abounded."
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Reply to Faustus the Manichæan 19.7
… The law given by Moses is that which by Jesus Christ became grace and truth. The law given by Moses is that of which Christ says, "He wrote of me." For undoubtedly this is the law which entered that the offence might abound;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.12
Observe also what follows. Having said, “In which all have sinned,” he at once added, “For until the law, sin was in the world.” This means that sin could not be taken away even by the law, which entered that sin might the more abound,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.20
“Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 3.20
… “The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law.” We all sinned in one, so that we all die in one; we received the law, not by amendment according to its precepts to put an end to sin, but by transgression to increase it. For “the law entered that sin might abound;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 9
… and then says that “the law, however, entered, that the offence might abound: but where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: that as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 21
… Since, however, the subject is an important one, it will not be unsuitable, if with a view to its illustration, we linger over the many testimonies which again and again meet our view. Now, the apostle says that that law by which no man is justified, entered in that the offence might abound,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter 24
… At present, however, I beg you to observe how he speaks of the letter that killeth, and contrasts therewith the spirit that giveth life. Now this must certainly be “the ministration of death written and engraven in stones,” and “the ministration of condemnation,” since the law entered that sin might abound.
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Concerning Man’s Perfection in Righteousness 42
… or as if its commandments had been given to proud men for any other reason than that “the law was added because of transgression, until the seed should come to whom the promise was made.” “It entered, therefore, that the offence might abound; but where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin 2.29
… not in order that any one might perish who in the mercy of God understood this even in that early age; but that, destined though he was to punishment, owing to the dominion of death, and manifested, too, as guilty through his own violation of the law, he might seek God’s help, and so where sin abounded, grace might much more abound,
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 1.13
… For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect. Because the law worketh wrath, for where no law is, there is no transgression.” And in another place: “Moreover, the law entered that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded grace did much more abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 3.7
… but God gave it to Abraham by promise.” So that, because the law was made four hundred and thirty years after, it might enter that the offence might abound;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on Grace and Free Will 44
… But men, without understanding, have thought that this was in fact said, when they heard these words of the apostle: “Moreover, the law entered, that the offence might abound; but where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 The Harmony of the Gospels 1.32
… or that she has not been confounded, like one put to shame, when it was a great crime to be or to become a Christian? or that she is made to forget her confusion for ever, because, where sin had abounded, grace did much more abound?
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 21.11
… For indeed He found them full of and laden with sins. Wherefore He saith, “Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden.” Laden! with what, but with the burdens of sins and transgressions of the Law? “For the Law entered that sin might abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 65.4
… Let not them keep them off from salvation, who to what they have so derived have added much more evil. The elder in age is the elder in iniquity too. But the grace of God effaces what thou hast derived, effaces too what thou hast added. For, “where sin abounded, grace hath superabounded.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Sermons on Selected Lessons of the New Testament 75.2
… The Law therefore was useful to discover sins, because that man being made more abundantly guilty by the transgression of the Law, might, having tamed his pride, implore the help of Him That pitieth. Attend to the Apostle; “The Law entered that sin might abound; but where sin abounded, grace hath much more abounded.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John 49.23
… That He can raise to life even one who is putrid and hath been four days [dead]. “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; and, “Where sin abounded, grace also did superabound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 59.2.4
… But “there shall be declared consummations in the anger of consummation;” it shall be preached by the Apostles, that “where sin hath abounded, grace shall much more abound,”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 66.12
… “Let not them that are bitter be exalted in their own selves.” O flesh miserable and wasting, art thou not sinful? Why crieth out thy tongue? Let the conscience be listened to. “For all men have sinned, and need the glory of God.” Know thyself, human weakness. Thou didst receive the Law, in order that a transgressor also of the Law thou mightest be:
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 68.10
… nevertheless, itself he hath said is made weak, because by weak men it cannot be fulfilled. But the inheritance, that is, the people, without any doubt is understood to have been made weak by the giving to them of the Law. For “the Law came in, that transgression might abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 68.28
… “That Thy foot may be stained in blood” ( ver. 23 ): that is, in order that they themselves who are turned to Thee, or to deliver whom Thou art turned, though in the deep of the sea by the burden of iniquity they may have been sunk, may make so great proficiency by Thy Grace (for where there hath abounded sin, there hath superabounded grace
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 84.10
… Having received the command, men tried as by their own strength to obey it; conquered by lust, they became guilty of transgression of this very command also. But what saith the Apostle? “Where sin abounded, grace hath much more abounded;”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 111.3
… But perhaps the work of man preventeth that glorious work of God, so that when he hath confessed his sins, he deserveth to be justified.…This is the glorious work of the Lord: for he loveth most, to whom most is forgiven. This is the glorious work of the Lord: for “where sin abounded, there did grace much more abound.”
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.4
29. “Take Thou from me the way of iniquity” ( ver. 29 ). And since the law of works hath entered in, that sin might abound;
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 Expositions on the Book of Psalms 119.15
… “As transgressors;” or rather “transgressing,” for the Greek saith, παραβαίνοντας , not παραβ€τας .… “The law entered that sin might abound.” But since all sins are remitted through grace, not only those which are committed without the law, but those also which are committed in the law; he addeth, “But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.”
Pope St Leo I the Great † AD 461 Letters 124
… For the pouring out of the blood of the righteous on behalf of the unrighteous was so powerful in its effect , so rich a ransom that, if the whole body of us prisoners only believed in their Redeemer, not one would be held in the tyrant’s bonds: since as the Apostle says, “where sin abounded, grace also did much more abound
5:21
Tertullian † AD 220 On the Resurrection of the Flesh 47
… if we have been planted together in the likeness of Christ’s death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection.” By a figure we die in our baptism, but in a reality we rise again in the flesh, even as Christ did, “that, as sin has reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness unto life eternal, through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom on Paul's Epistle to the Romans 10
Ver. 21 . “That as sin reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life, through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
St John Chrysostom † AD 407 Homilies on First Corinthians 9
… For example, the word “Captivity” seems to be the name of an evil thing, but Paul has applied it in a good sense, when he says, “Bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” ( 2 Cor. x. 5 .) And again, to an evil thing he hath applied a good word, saying, “Sin reigned,” (
St Augustine of Hippo † AD 430 A Treatise on the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins, and on the Baptism of Infants 1.20
“Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound.” This addition to original sin men now made of their own wilfulness, not through Adam; but even this is done away and remedied by Christ, because “where sin abounded, grace did much more abound; that as sin hath reigned unto death”
5:1
1. BEING JUSTIFIED THEREFORE BY FAITH, LET US HAVE PEACE WITH GOD THROUGH OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST. — "Let us have peace": thus read the Roman Bible, Origen, Chrysostom, Theodoret, Ambrose, Theophylactus; but the Syriac and Greek have the form, that is "we have peace." For the Apostle aptly infers this from the preceding, as if to say, As Ambrose and Toletus explain, we have peace, that is reconciliation and friendship with God, from the fact that we are already justified by faith in Christ. But, reading with the Romans and others, not "we have" but "let us have" peace, first Oecumenius and Anselm give this sense, as if to say, Paul: Since we are already justified by Christ, hence it is fitting that all preserve peace in Christ, and let not Jews contend with Gentiles concerning justice and precedence. But the phrase "with God" is opposed to this sense, which signifies that the Apostle speaks of the peace which we have not with men, but with God. Hence secondly, St. Chrysostom and Theodoret thus explain, as if to say, Let us have peace, that is friendship with God accepted in justification, that is let us preserve it. This seems very literal. Thirdly, and most genuinely, according to Paul's mind we thus expound it, as if to say, Since we are already justified by faith and the grace of Christ, as I have hitherto demonstrated, let us have peace, that is let us be of peaceful and tranquil mind, henceforth fearing no vengeance of God and condemnation; let us be of mind free from the terrors which an evil conscience is wont to bring, joyful and serene, as being already reconciled with God, and God's friends and children. This peace therefore is moral tranquility, serenity and confidence of a just and good conscience, arising not from the certainty of divine faith, by which someone most certainly believes that his sins have been remitted through Christ, as the Novatians wish; but from conjectures and signs, which give a certain moral certainty, that we are just; when the conscience, trusting that the remission and pardon of crimes has been accepted in baptism, or in the sacrament of Penance, conscious of no sin, is not troubled or bitten; but peacefully and calmly strives for purity and holiness, fixing hope and love in God and heavenly things, and rightly tending toward blessedness and eternal glory. This peace of conscience is a great good, so that St. Tiburtius the martyr rightly said: "All punishment is vile to us, where a pure conscience is our companion." On which more in 1 Tim. 1, 5. Again this peace is an impenetrable shield, by which we receive and break all the arrows of the enemy. Hear St. Leo, sermon 6 On the Nativity of Christ: "The whole world lies in evil; and, with the devil and his angels plotting, it is troubled by innumerable temptations, so that man striving toward heavenly things is either terrified by adversities or corrupted by prosperity; but greater is he who is in us than he who is against us; and to those having peace with God, and always saying to the Father with all their heart, Thy will be done, no contests can prevail, no conflicts can harm." He adds "just": because denying consent of the mind to the lusts of the flesh, we indeed stir up the enmities of him who is the author of sin against us, but we establish an impregnable peace with God by serving his grace, so that we are subject to our king not only in obedience, but also joined in judgment. Wherefore "he himself will now finish all battles for us: he who gave the will will also give the power, so that we may be cooperators in his works, and with the exultation of faith we may say that prophetic word: The Lord is my illumination and my salvation, whom shall I fear? The Lord is the defender of my life, from whom shall I tremble?"
5:2
2. THROUGH WHOM ALSO WE HAVE ACCESS BY FAITH INTO THIS GRACE — of justification and remission of sins, from which this peace follows. Note: The "and" here is not so much a copulative as an explicative and causal conjunction, and means the same as "namely," that is to say, We have peace through Jesus Christ, namely through whom we have access to this grace. Thus St. Chrysostom. IN WHICH WE STAND, — that is, we persevere constantly, in Greek hestēkamen, that is, we stand upright, we remain firm. WE GLORY IN HOPE. — ep' elpidi, that is, under hope, or on account of hope, or because we hope for the glory prepared for the sons of God: in Greek "of sons" is lacking. Note: The first fruit and excellence of justice is peace, verse 1. The second is hope of glory, verse 2. The third is, greatness of soul and joy in adversities on account of hope of glory. "And to do and to suffer great things is not Roman, as Scaevola used to say, but Christian." The fourth is, that through it we are made friends of God and beloved through charity, verse 5. The fifth is, that through it we are adopted by God as sons, and therefore we glory in Him as Father, verse 11. The sixth is, the reward of eternal life, the last verse.
5:3
3. Not only (namely we glory in this hope, says Theophylactus), BUT ALSO WE GLORY IN TRIBULATIONS, — which we suffer on account of Christ, or for Christ, and the Christian life, counting them to be distinguished gifts and benefits with which He Himself bestows upon us, perfects and promotes us to patience and every virtue, and especially to the sure hope of future glory. For He Himself the Apostle gives this reason, when he adds: "Knowing that tribulation worketh patience." St. Bernard gives the same reason, sermon 17 on Psalm 90: "For indeed," he says, "in tribulation is the hope of glory, nay and the glory itself is contained in tribulation, just as the hope of fruit is in the seed, so also the fruit itself is in the seed." He adds a second reason: because God promises and says, "I am with him in tribulation." This is what St. Martin answered to the devil when he lied to him, saying Christ appeared in glory: "Christ appears to His own in this life only on the cross": thus Sulpitius in his Life. Now who would not desire, who would not rejoice to be where Christ is, where God is? "It is good," says St. Bernard in the same place, "for me, O Lord, rather to be afflicted, provided Thou art with me, than to reign without Thee, to feast without Thee, to glory without Thee. It is good in tribulation more to embrace Thee, to have Thee with me on the way, than to be without Thee even in heaven. For what have I in heaven, and what have I desired upon earth besides Thee?" Excellently St. Augustine in Sentences, no. 226: "In the present," he says, "life, both temporal delights are sweet, and temporal tribulations are bitter. But who would not drink the cup of tribulation, fearing the fire of hell? And who would not despise the sweetness of the world, longing for the goods of eternal life?" KNOWING THAT TRIBULATION WORKETH PATIENCE. — "Worketh," as a cause not efficient, but material, namely as an occasion, object and incentive of patience: concerning which see Chrysostom in the moral homily 9. In a similar manner and sense it is commonly said, that torturers of martyrs, and the impious who vex the pious, fabricate a crown in the heavens. For Paul speaks of the just, steadfast and wise, who from tribulation become stronger and more perfect, not of the timid and fickle, who yield to tribulation and succumb. St. Chrysostom adds and notes here that God in this fallen state, in which we flow with concupiscence, has necessarily sent tribulations upon us to chastise and restrain it. For just as wild birds are tamed by a cage, unbroken horses by a bridle, dogs by a leash: so through tribulations man, otherwise unruly and untamed, becomes mild, patient, flexible, obedient to God. Whence Cardinal Hugo notes that the Apostle here hints that patience is as it were fertile ground, which tribulation worketh, that is, ploughs and cultivates, so that it may bear fruit of merits, in that sense in which Genesis 2 Adam is said to be placed in paradise, so that he should work it. Hence it is clear how eagerly every tribulation ought to be received, as being like a diligent farmer, exercising our patience, as it were the earth, so that it may produce an abundant harvest of merits.
5:4
4. PATIENCE MOREOVER (worketh) PROBATION, — namely because it proves us and our virtue, as a furnace proves gold. Secondly and better from patience (worketh) "probation", that is the end of probation, an experiment namely (for this is what the Greek dokimē signifies, which is taken not actively, but passively only), so that the mind of the patient may be proved and tested, and it may be evident how much he esteems God and heavenly things (inasmuch as he endures so much so generously for them), and consequently how praiseworthy and exalted he is. Thus Cajetan and Toledo. Otherwise St. James takes "probation", cap. 1, when on the contrary he says that the probation of faith worketh patience, namely on account of the tribulation and persecution itself, which exercises and proves man: for these he worketh and stirs up patience in that sense which I gave a little before. Wherefore St. Augustine, in the Sentences (which St. Prosper excerpted from him and are found at the end of volume III of St. Augustine), no. 186: "Let not man complain," he says, "when in those things which he justly possesses, he suffers some adversities. For through the bitterness of inferior things he is taught to love better things, lest the traveller tending toward his homeland love the stable too much in the manner of beasts." PROBATION MOREOVER (worketh) HOPE, — that is the strength and vigor of hope. Thus St. Chrysostom and Anselm: for otherwise simply hope precedes and worketh patience and probation. Hence against the Novatians note: Although hope rests primarily on the help and grace of God, secondarily however it rests also on the good works of patience, and other things done from grace. These three things strengthen hope, says Bernard in the Sentences: First, is humility joined with wisdom; second, the firmness of constant patience; third, the truth of hidden inspiration.
5:5
5. But hope confoundeth not. — ou kataischynei, that is, it is not wont to put to shame, because namely it doth not frustrate the one who hopes, nor deceive him, but leadeth him certainly to the attainment of the thing hoped for from God. Otherwise it is with false hope, which we place in men, which often deceiveth, and therefore bringeth shame: thus Theophylactus and Anselmus. For what are the hopes of mortals, except (as Plato used to say) the dreams of the waking, or rather of those who desire? "Hope," saith St. Bernard, serm. 37 in Cant., "confoundeth not, because it infuseth certainty; for through this the Spirit himself beareth witness to our spirit, that we are the children of God." Truly St. Augustine upon that passage of Psalm 30, "Thou hast hated them that observe vanities to no purpose: but I have hoped in the Lord": "I," saith he, "who observe not vanity, have hoped in the Lord. Thou hopest in money, thou observest vanity; thou hopest in honour and some sublimity of human power, thou observest vanity; thou hopest in some powerful friend, thou observest vanity. In all these things when thou hopest, either thou diest, and leavest them here; or when thou livest, all things perish, and thou failest in thy hope. This vanity Isaiah commemorateth, saying: All flesh is grass, and all the glory thereof as the flower of grass. The grass is withered, and the flower thereof is fallen: but the word of the Lord remaineth for ever. But I, not as those who hope in vanities and observe them, but have hoped in the Lord, who is not vanity," but truth and stability itself. The same upon that passage of Psalm 9, "Let all them hope in thee that know thy name": "Let them not hope," saith he, "in those things which pass away with the flux of time, having nothing except Will be and Was. For what in them shall be, when it cometh, straightway becometh past, and what is awaited with desire is lost with sorrow. But in the nature of God there shall not be something else, as though it were not yet, or was, as though it were no longer; but only that is which is, and it itself is eternity. Let them therefore cease to hope in and love temporal things, and let them betake themselves to eternal hope, who know his name, who said: I am who am." Most excellently indeed, from this foundation of the Apostle, namely that hope confoundeth not, St. Bernard stirreth all to hope in God, serm. 9 in Psal. Qui habitat: "Since," saith he, "thou art, O Lord, my hope, thou hast made the highest thy refuge for me. Whatsoever is to be done, whatsoever to be avoided, whatsoever to be borne, whatsoever to be wrought, thou art, O Lord, my hope. This one thing is the cause of all thy promises to me, this is the whole reason of my expectation. Let another set forth his merit, let him boast that he can bear the burden of the day and the heat, let him say that he fasteth twice on the sabbath, finally let him glory that he is not as the rest of men: but for me it is good to cleave to God, to place my hope in the Lord my God. Let him hope who will in the uncertainty of riches. But I truly hope not even for the necessaries of life except from thee, namely trusting in thy word, in which I have cast away all things. Surely to thee is the poor man left, to the orphan thou wilt be a helper." Then in each particular case one must hope: "through thee I shall hope to obtain. If battles rise up against me, if the world rage, if the malignant one roar, if the flesh lust against the spirit, in thee will I hope. He who saith: Since thou art, O Lord, my hope, let him cast his thought upon the Lord, knowing that he is to be nourished by him, as it is written: Casting all your care upon him, for he hath care of you. For why, if we understand these things, why do we delay to cast away utterly miserable, vain, useless, seductive hopes, and to cleave with all devotion of mind to this one so solid, so blessed hope?" And assigning the reason for this solidity of hope, he addeth: "If anything be impossible to him, if anything be difficult, seek another in whom to hope: but by his word all things he can. What is easier to say? Or dost thou not now doubt of the facility, but the will itself is suspect to thee? when in him who hopeth in himself that majesty should fail, which so earnestly admonisheth to hope in himself? plainly he forsaketh not them that hope in him. He will help them, saith he, and deliver them from sinners. Seek, by what merits? because they hoped in him. A sweet cause, yet efficacious and irrefragable. Who hath hoped in him, and was confounded?" And this is a sharp stimulus, which has stirred up the holy heroes, and even now stirs them up to daring great things, to undertake or endure heroic and difficult deeds bravely for God. For they knew themselves not to be confounded, because hope confoundeth not. Concerning these St. Bernard, sermon 32 in the Canticles: "Now indeed," he says, "I think the scheme of a great father of a family, or of royal majesty, appears to those who, drawing near to a lofty heart, made more magnanimous by greater freedom of spirit and purity of conscience, have been accustomed to dare greater things." He gives examples: "Such was Moses, who dared to say to God: If I have found favour in thy sight, shew me thyself. Such was Philip, who begged that the Father be shown to himself and his fellow disciples. Such also was Thomas, who refused to believe unless he should touch the wound with his own hand and the pierced side. Small faith, but descending in a wondrous way from greatness of soul. Such also was David, who himself said to God: My heart hath said to thee, my face hath sought thee: thy face, O Lord, will I still seek. Such therefore dare great things, because they are great; and what they dare they obtain, according to the word of promise to them, which is of this kind: Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, shall be yours. For great faith indeed deserves great things; and in so far as thou shalt stretch forth the foot of confidence in the goods of the Lord, so far shalt thou possess them." And a little further on: "Therefore to such great spirits a great bridegroom comes forth, and will do great things with them, so that he who is of such a kind may say: Because he that is mighty hath done great things to me. The king in his beauty shall their eyes behold, going before them to the fair places of the desert, to the flowers of roses, and lilies of the valleys, to the pleasant gardens, and watered fountains, to the delights of the cellars, and the fragrance of spices, finally to the very secrets of the chamber. Blessed is he who hath filled his desire from these very things." BECAUSE THE CHARITY OF GOD IS POURED FORTH IN OUR HEARTS BY THE HOLY GHOST, WHO IS GIVEN TO US.—Thou wilt ask, what charity of God is here understood? First, St. Chrysostom, Theophylactus, Ambrose, Cajetan and Toletus answer that the charity of God is the charity which is in God himself, by which God loveth us: this poured forth, or, as it is in Greek, ekkechytai, that is poured out, "is in our hearts." Because in them it worketh charity, grace and all the gifts and virtues of the Holy Ghost. The following passages, especially verse 8, strongly favour this sense. In like manner it is commonly said: The liberality of the king is poured forth upon this prince; as if Paul said: Hope confoundeth not, because the charity and liberality of God, in whom we hope, is poured forth and spread abroad in us, because namely now through the justice of faith, not of the law, we have received from God's charity the Holy Ghost, by whom we are made partakers of the divine nature, friends of God, beloved, dear to him, and by him endowed and enriched with all graces and virtues. But if before we were such, God gave his Son for us unto death; much more now that we are made such, will he give us, as to his friends and sons, as a most loving father, those things which we hope for and ask of him, and which he himself hath promised to his sons. Second, St. Augustine, On the Spirit and the Letter, XXXII; St. Bernard, epistle 107, Anselm and throughout the Scholastic Doctors, nay even the Council of Trent itself, session VI, chapter VII, understand by "the charity of God" here not that which is in God himself uncreated and eternal, but that which is in us created and given by God in time, which namely God infuseth into us, that we may love him: for that properly is said to be spread forth or poured out, as if Paul said: Hope of eternal things confoundeth us not, because we have charity, by which we love God and are friends of God: but God will not confound his friends who hope in him, nay rather to those loving him he hath prepared these eternal goods which are hoped for: for the particle "for" giveth the cause of the preceding, why namely hope confoundeth not. Note: By the word "poured out," Paul intimateth that charity extendeth itself to perfect all the motions and acts of the soul: thus St. Thomas. Third, the sense will be most complete, if thou takest the charity of God both ways, namely created and uncreated; and Origen, Theodoret, Oecumenius and St. Thomas explain this passage concerning both, as if Paul said: The uncreated charity of God hath poured itself forth through the created charity diffused and poured out by itself in our hearts; and therefore the hope which we have in God will not confound us, nor put us to shame, in that sense which I have already given. Note that Paul says: "By the Holy Spirit, who is given to us." From this it is evident that in justification not only the grace of the Holy Spirit, but the Holy Spirit himself as it were the first gift of God is given to us; for not only does the Holy Spirit communicate to us charity and his gifts, but through them the Holy Spirit himself dwells in us: for although he was in the soul before by essence, power, and presence, he is nevertheless given again to the soul when it is justified, so that he may be in it in a new manner, namely as in his temple, and may sanctify it through charity and make it a partaker of his love. For he himself is the first and uncreated love. Hence is refuted the error of the Master of the Sentences, lib. I Sent., dist. 16 and 17, teaching that charity which is in us is not a created and infused quality, but is the Holy Spirit himself, who by himself alone without an infused habit of charity operates in us and with us the act of love; for the Apostle asserts here that charity is poured forth in our hearts: but the Holy Spirit cannot be poured forth except through charity and other created and infused gifts. Secondly, because the Apostle distinguishes here charity from the Holy Spirit, as an effect from its cause, for he says: "The charity of God is poured forth by the Holy Spirit;" therefore charity is other and diverse from the Holy Spirit. Just as light poured forth in this house by a lamp is other than the lamp pouring forth the light. You will say: St. Augustine, lib. De Trinitate, cap. VII and VIII, and elsewhere, says that charity, than which nothing is better, is God and that we love God with charity, which is God. This opinion gave the Master of the Sentences occasion for error. I answer that Augustine speaks in the manner of the Platonists: for he himself before his conversion was a Platonist. But the Platonists used this phrase so as to say that we are good by the goodness of God, loving by the love of God, wise by the wisdom of God, that we know the truth truly by immutable truth, which is God, by which phrase they wished only to signify that goodness, love, wisdom, truth, by which we are formally good, loving, wise, true, are a certain participation of goodness, love, wisdom, and uncreated truth, which is in God, not however that by love, wisdom, goodness, which is in God, we are formally loving, wise, good: for this is impossible. There is therefore a metonymy in this phrase; for when it is said: Our charity is God, the sense is: Our created charity flows from uncreated charity, which is God himself; and thus our charity is not formally, but originally, causally and participatively God himself. Again, from this place of the Apostle it can be proved that justice is a quality and gift inhering in us. For this the verb "is poured forth in our hearts" insinuates, and the phrase "by the Holy Spirit, who is given to us." Thus the Council of Trent, in the place already cited. Whence St. Augustine, lib. III De Doctrina Christiana, cap. X: "Charity," he says, "I call a motion of the soul toward enjoying God, for his own sake; and oneself and one's neighbor, for the sake of God." And lib. De Moribus Ecclesiae: "Virtue," he says, "that (charity or love) which is the most right affection of our soul itself, if it is in another, favors that we be joined to God; if it is in us, it itself joins us." Moreover St. Augustine, Sentence 348, from this place teaches that many Christians are made one by one Holy Spirit and one charity in the unity of love: "Of many," he says, "men there are many souls and many hearts: but where through love and faith they adhere to God, one soul and one heart are made. If therefore the charity of God poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, who is given to us, makes such unity of many souls and many hearts; how much more in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, eternal and immutable unity remains, so that an indifferent Trinity, one God, one light and one principle." HAS BEEN POURED OUT,—both in baptism and in works of penance, charity and other virtues, by which we are justified either first or more fully; then properly and particularly in the laying on of hands, as St. Augustine says, book VI Against Julian, chapter XI, namely in the sacrament of Confirmation: for in it the strength and fullness of the Holy Spirit is given and poured out. Note this passage of Augustine: from it indeed against the Novatians it is clear that Confirmation confers grace, indeed the fullness of grace, and consequently is a Sacrament of the new law. For this laying on of hands is not Ordination, but Confirmation: because this outpouring of charity, which is effected through it, belongs not to Clerics alone, but to all Christians. For the Apostle speaks here to all Christians, who formerly immediately after baptism received the sacrament of Confirmation, since only Clerics received Ordination. Furthermore, the Holy Spirit pours out this charity in us, so that through it He may make the law and yoke of Christ easy and sweet. Hear St. Augustine in the Sentences, number 222: "Every commandment of God is light to one who loves. Nor is the saying, My yoke is easy, understood for any other reason, except that through the Holy Spirit charity is poured out in our hearts, so that by loving we do freely: because what anyone does from fear, he does slavishly. Nor is the mind right, when it would prefer, if it could be done, that what is right were not commanded."
5:6
6. WHY THEN DID CHRIST, WHEN WE WERE YET WEAK, ACCORDING TO THE TIME DIE FOR THE IMPIOUS?—It is a continuation. For someone will say: How does it follow, The charity and love of God is poured out in our hearts: therefore hope confoundeth not. The Apostle proves this consequence in the manner which I have already said from Chrysostom a little before in the preceding verse. Note: The Apostle here calls "weak" sinners: for these are weak from the disease of sin and consequently powerless for works of salvation, and for procuring salvation for themselves. Thus Theodoret. ACCORDING TO THE TIME.—In Greek kata kairon, that is, opportunely, in due time; namely when, as St. Jerome says, To Algasia, epistle 151, question II and VII: "All things were full of infidelity and sin, and especially needed redemption and a physician." Or, as Theodoret: "When the time prescribed by the Father was fulfilled." Thus also Theophylactus. Or, as Sedulius: "When it was the last age of the world." For thus the Hebrews say ka'eth, that is "according to the time," for what we say, "At this time, in this age." Otherwise Ambrose and St. Anselm explain it: "According to the time," they say, that is, for a time, namely a brief time, Christ died, because He rose on the third day. Likewise also Chrysostom, who connects this with "weak"; as if to say, When we were weak according to the time, that is, for that time in which we were weak; when namely it was a time of weakness and law, not of grace, then Christ died: but the first sense is more genuine, and agrees better with the Greek phrase and the mind of Paul.
5:7
7. SCARCELY FOR A JUST MAN WILL ONE DIE: FOR PERHAPS FOR A GOOD MAN SOMEONE MIGHT DARE TO DIE. — St. Jerome, to Algasia, epistle 151, question VII, brings forth five senses of this passage. The first is that of Marcion, who, making two gods, one of the Old Testament, the second of the New, said that the former is called here "just" and severe, for whom few or none underwent death; but the latter "good" and benign, for whom very many Martyrs died. The second is that of Arius, bringing forth that Christ is "just," the Father is "good." The third is that of others, whom Eucherius later followed, in Questions on the New Testament, saying that the "just" is the old law; for this was indeed the law of justice. But the "good" is Christ and the law of the Gospel: for this is the law of goodness and clemency, whence it also has very many Saints and Martyrs. The fourth is that of those who think that the same is called here "just" and "good," namely Christ. The fifth, which pleases St. Jerome, is, "for a just and good man," that is for justice and a good thing, for example for defending truth, scarcely and rarely does anyone expose himself to death. The sixth is that of the Ambrosian commentary, "just" is a perfect man, "good" is simple and innocent, on account of whose compassion more easily does one die for him. The seventh is that of Cajetan, "just" is one endowed with virtue, "good" is one excellent in holiness and religion. The eighth is that of St. Thomas, that the same is "just" and "good," in this sense, as if to say: Scarcely for a just man will one die. I said "scarcely," because it can happen that someone dies for a good, that is just, man, as if to say: Scarcely are there; yet there are some who expose themselves to death for a good and just man. The ninth is that of others, who explain thus, for a just man, that is for justice, scarcely anyone; for a good man, that is for his own utility, some dare to die. The tenth, most excellently and most genuinely Catharinus and Vatablus think that "just" is called here a holy man, but "good" one who is beneficent, and who by his beneficence conciliates to himself the love of many; so that to agathou is put for agathopoiou, or agathopoiountos, for thus it is also put and taken in 1 Kings 25:15; Psalm 72:1; Galatians 5:22 (where goodness, which is the fruit of the Holy Spirit, is the same as beneficence); 1 Kings 29:6; Proverbs 22:9, in the Hebrew, where thus it is said, tob ain, that is, "good of eye"; that is, as our Interpreter translates, "inclined to mercy, shall be blessed." Thus Codrus, the Decii, Samson and others for their country, which was good to them, that is beneficent, underwent death. Thus also Leonidas, king of the Lacedaemonians, when about to rush with three hundred into the camp of Xerxes, when asked by the Ephors whether he wished anything: "I," said he, "go in name as if about to fight for the Greeks, but in reality about to die for my country." And to his men: "Dine, fellow soldiers, as if about to sup among the shades below;" and so rushing upon the enemy and fighting most bravely he fell. Note: For "dare," in Greek it is tolmai, that is, sustain.
5:8
8. GOD COMMENDS HIS CHARITY TOWARD US — without any fatigue or trouble to himself, by a single word and nod, he could effect the same thing: thus Oecumenius. The whole discourse of the Apostle tends to this, that he proves that among men there is none of such charity as to wish to die for a just man, but few and rare are those who undergo death for their benefactors: yet Christ from his charity and that of the Father toward us, wished to die for us, and for those unjust, and evildoers and sinners: therefore Christ far surpasses and transcends all the charity of all men. See here and marvel at the immensity of the love of God and Christ. The object of love is good: nor do men love anything except because it is beautiful, wise, rich, delicate, noble and in sum good. What good in us, O Lord, did you find, what beauty that you would love? We were foul, foolish, beggars, putrid, vile, miserable and wretched. "I loved the foul," he says, "that I might make them beautiful; I loved enemies, that I might make them friends; I loved the foolish, that I might make them wise; I loved beggars, that I might make them rich; the vile, that I might make them noble; the miserable, that I might make them blessed and glorious." This is the loftiness and nobility of divine love, by which it transcends all created loves, so that it does not find an object, but by loving creates one. For the reason of loving in God is sought and founded not in the object loved, but in God himself loving. Therefore he loves, that he might communicate his goods to the wicked, that he might pour out his love upon enemies, and make them from enemies friends, indeed sons and heirs, as St. Dionysius teaches, in the book On Divine Names. Moreover, this love of God is made admirable and wonderful by the fact that he gave not an angel, not a Seraph, but himself for us, the vilest worms of the earth: and he gave himself not in any manner, but unto death and the cross. He could redeem and save us in a thousand ways, but that he might show his divine and immense love toward us, he wished to give himself for us as a ransom, and to pour out all his blood, spirit and life for us. O love, how much you loved us! O love! O wonder!
5:9
5:10
10. IF INDEED WHEN WE WERE ENEMIES, WE WERE RECONCILED TO GOD BY THE DEATH OF HIS SON: MUCH MORE BEING RECONCILED, SHALL WE BE SAVED IN HIS LIFE. — "In His life," namely that life by which Christ himself, after he rose from the dead, now lives a blessed and glorious life. This is the argument of the Apostle: If Christ deigned to die for us, and by dying through his death reconciled us to God the Father; much more he himself now living in glory will perfect the work which he began, and will save us already reconciled to himself and the Father, and as it were as mediator will effect the resurrection of our soul and body: for now there is no labor of death or suffering for him, and he is in the highest glory, power and love for us, so that without labor he saves us. Behold this is the charity of God and Christ toward us, which he treated in verse 5 and thereafter, as if to say, Among men there is no one of such charity: for to prove this he brings forward and exaggerates the charity of God toward us. See St. Augustine, book XIII On the Trinity, chapter X.
5:11
11. Not only, as if to say, Not only do we glory in the hope of glory, nor in tribulations alone, as I said in verse 3; for he returns to this after a long parenthesis. See Canon 38. BUT ALSO WE GLORY IN GOD (that is, we glory and proclaim that we have God as father, friend, intimate, guardian, protector, and lover beyond measure, says St. Chrysostom, and this through the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ), BY WHOM NOW WE HAVE RECEIVED RECONCILIATION. — Otherwise Anselm: "We glory," he says, "in God," in that we consider ourselves to be with him in glory. Finally Theodoret refers these things to the immediately preceding passages, as if to say, Paul: Not only do we hope for salvation in the future, but also in the present we glory in the Lord. But the first exposition of Chrysostom is more in accordance with the mind and spirit of the Apostle.
5:12
12. THEREFORE AS BY ONE MAN SIN ENTERED INTO THIS WORLD. — "Therefore," namely because, as I have already shown, Christ loved us with such great charity that He reconciled us to the Father by His death. For the Apostle continues here to show the greatness of Christ's charity toward men, as if to say, "Therefore," that is, in order that I may further declare Christ's charity toward men, therefore I say that He is the second Adam, and that on account of His charity and the benefits bestowed upon men He is more truly our parent than Adam was, since the latter is the author of death, but Christ is the author of life to all His children. AS BY ONE MAN SIN ENTERED INTO THIS WORLD. — This is an anantapodoton. For the other part of the comparison or parallel is lacking, and it must be supplied in this way: So by one man, namely Christ, justice entered into the world, and by justice life, and thus life passed into all: in which all are justified and vivified, whoever have been reborn from Christ through baptism and grace: for these things must plainly be supplied from verses 15 and following; indeed, as Origen and Cajetan have rightly noted, the Apostle himself, after a long hyperbaton, by which he is carried away in his usual manner, supplies and completes these same things in verse 18. He does similarly at Ephesians III, where the sentence begun in verse 1, after a long digression, he finally completes and perfects in verse 14. See canon 38. Salmeron adapts this otherwise, namely, so that these things depend on the preceding, as if Paul said: "Therefore" (so that namely we may glory in Christ, and through Christ) we have received reconciliation through Christ: just as on the other hand we have received sin, death and damnation through one man, namely Adam, and have incurred them. But this is a more difficult and complex recalling and understanding of the preceding. "By one," Erasmus translated, "on account of one." But wrongly, and against all interpreters: for the Greek dia with the genitive means "by" or "through," not "on account of." You will ask, who is this one man? Ambrose answers that it is Eve. But it is clear from what follows that it is not Eve, but Adam: for Paul opposes him to Christ. Although Eve first sinned, yet Adam was the primary cause, both of generation and of original sin and its propagation: because in him, as it were in a head, our original innocence and justice were established. Whence it is very probable that the opinion of those who maintain that if Adam had not sinned, even though Eve sinned, original sin would not have been transmitted, is true. Thus in II, Question 81, article 5, many think with St. Thomas: although some hold the contrary view probably, saying that Eve is also understood under Adam. For Adam and Eve were one flesh, and as it were one person: whence it seems to follow that whether Eve alone sinned or Adam alone sinned, all his descendants would have contracted original sin from it. Thirdly, to pass over the Indians and other Pagans, who cannot truly be said to have imitated Adam's sin, of which they heard nothing: the Apostle teaches that all men sinned in Adam; therefore infants also sinned in Adam: but infants can have no actual sin: therefore it is necessary that they have original sin propagated from Adam. Fourthly, because the Council of Milevis, canon 2, teaches that this passage of the Apostle must be understood of original sin, which is transmitted by generation. Erasmus answers that the Council of Milevis was particular, and therefore he is not bound by its decrees. But he errs: for this Council was approved by Innocent I, as is clear from his letter to that Council; and the same decree was renewed in the same words by the Council of Trent (which was ecumenical), session V, canon 4. You will say: St. Chrysostom, at this verse and at verse 19, says that we are born from Adam sinners and disobedient, not properly, but improperly, namely sinners, that is, liable to punishment, and guilty of death, namely mortal, passible, miserable. I answer: St. Chrysostom wishes to say that we are born from Adam sinners, not properly, that is, not by our own act, but by another's, namely Adam's, from which we contract the guilt of original sin, by which we are guilty and liable to death. For that St. Chrysostom believed and taught that original sin inheres in and belongs to each man, is clear both from other passages of his, and especially from his homily 40 on I Corinthians. SIN ENTERED IN. — The Pelagians, denying original sin, as also the Anabaptists, Faber and Zwingli (to whom Erasmus here paved the way), teach that "sin" here is taken either metonymically, for the punishment of sin, that is death, which alone they say passed upon all, or secondly, that sin itself passed through not by propagation, but by imitation, because all thereafter sinning after Adam, even unknowingly followed him and in fact imitated him. Whence the Commentary ascribed to St. Jerome, which is not Jerome's, but Pelagius's: "Sin," he says, "entered into the world" through Adam; it entered, I say, by example or form, namely because Adam gave to all an example and form of sin. But these expositions, or rather evasions and refuges, cannot consist with the words of Paul; for, as St. Augustine rightly noted, in the book On the Merits of Sins, chapters VIII, IX and X, the Apostle says sin entered, and through sin death: therefore by sin he does not understand death, but sin properly so called, which is the cause of death. Secondly, because the Apostle says sin entered through Adam, just as justice entered through Christ; but justice entered into the world through Christ, not by imitation, nor in its effect alone, but properly by itself, and through the propagation and communication of Christ: therefore in like manner sin entered into the world through Adam. A second exposition of this passage, not unlike the former, is that of Theodoret, who asserts that the sin of Adam passed to posterity not by propagation, but by occasion and incitement; namely because from the sin of Adam all are born mortal, miserable, desirous, and hence it comes to pass that we fall into many sins. Whence it is clear that Theodoret here takes "sin" not properly, but metonymically, so that namely "sin" is the same as propensity and proclivity to sinning, namely so that "sin" is the same as concupiscence. But this exposition is refuted by the same arguments by which the former is. Moreover, the argument of Theodoret is this: Because, he says, the Apostle in verse 19 says this sin passed "into many," but not into all, as he would have said if he had understood original sin itself: therefore by "sin" he understands proneness to sinning; for not all, but many are prone to sin. But this reasoning is weak and worthless: for "many" here, as elsewhere, is the same as "all." For thus the Apostle himself explains it, verses 12 and 18. Note however that Theodoret believed in original sin, as is clear from chapter XII in the Epitome of Divine Decrees, where he confesses and establishes it. Thirdly, Cajetan teaches that here the Apostle only says that all the posterity of Adam incur a debt, or necessity of contracting original sin and death: but not that in fact all incur the same sin; for it is probable, he says, that the blessed Virgin did not incur original sin: again it is probable that not all the posterity of Adam incurred death: for Core, Dathan and Abiron went down alive to hell. But it is certain that this passage of the Apostle must be understood not only of the necessity of contracting original sin, but also of original sin itself, which in fact all contract. For he wishes to say that all the posterity of Adam in fact draw this sin from Adam and incur it. For thus this passage is understood and has always been understood by the Church, which in the Council of Orange, Milevis, Trent, session V, canons 2, 3, 4, proves and defines from this passage of the Apostle that all men, even infants, contract original sin. And this is clear from the very words of the Apostle: for he says, not the necessity of sinning, but sin itself entered the world, and through sin death, and adds: "And thus death passed into all men," namely, just as sin passed into all men: but not only the necessity of dying, but actual death itself passed into all: therefore in like manner not only the necessity of sinning, but sin itself in act passed into all. To the argument of Cajetan I reply that the privilege and exception of one blessed Virgin, or of a few others, of whom it must be said elsewhere, does not weaken the general law. For there is no law so general that it does not admit of exception. AND THROUGH SIN DEATH, AND THUS DEATH PASSED INTO ALL MEN. — Seneca therefore errs, and with him the Philosophers, whose common opinion is this: "Death is to man a nature, not a punishment;" but rather "death is to man a punishment, not a nature," as the Apostle teaches here, and in the Book of Wisdom, chapter II: "God," he says, "created man incorruptible," that is, immortal and incorruptible, in Greek ep' aphtharsia, that is, to immortality, or unto immortality, so that he would be immortal, if he wished to obey God and persist in his innocence. "But by the envy of the devil" sin entered, and through sin "death entered into the world." Cicero therefore wrongly accused nature, in that it was cruel to men and subjected them to diseases and death. Again wrongly Pythagoras, and from him Origen, held that the sins which the soul had committed in heaven before it was joined to the body were the cause of man's death and afflictions. Beautifully concerning these matters St. Augustine, in book V Against Julian, chapters XIV and XV, speaks thus: "In the third book of the Republic Tullius says that man is brought forth into life not by a mother, but as by a stepmother nature, naked in body and fragile and weak; but in mind anxious for troubles, humble to fears, soft for labors, prone to lusts, in which however there would be as it were a buried fire of genius and mind." This is Cicero. After this Augustine adds: "Nor did this author speak wrongly, attributing it to the morals of the living, but rather he accused nature itself. He saw the thing, he knew not the cause: for it was hidden from him why there was a heavy yoke upon the sons of Adam from the day of their going forth from the womb of their mother, until the day of burial; for since he was not learned in the sacred Scriptures, he was ignorant of original sin." And soon concerning Hortensius and others rising somewhat higher he adds: "Those who said that we are born for the sake of paying the penalty of punishments on account of some crimes undertaken in a former life, seem to have seen something; so that it might be true what is found in Aristotle, that we are affected with a punishment similar to those who once, when they had fallen into the hands of the Etruscan robbers, were killed by a cruelty devised, whose bodies alive were joined with the dead, adverse things with adverse things most aptly fitted together: thus our souls joined with bodies, so that the living are joined with the dead." But here and elsewhere the Scriptures teach that the sin of the first parent Adam is the cause of his death and of all his posterity, and consequently of all the afflictions of this life as well. Note here first: Together with sin death entered into man, so that, just as lictors are sent into the houses and goods of the guilty, immediately after they have sinned, so death was sent into guilty men, and gradually gnaws at and consumes them. While therefore we live, we carry death (namely the principles and causes of death) in our bowels, which ceases not to produce for us diseases and afflictions, until it finally mortifies and consumes us. Hence the Apostle says: "The body is dead because of sin:" dead, that is, so subject to the necessity of death and afflictions, that it seems to be not so much alive as a dead corpse. Great therefore is the punishment of the soul in that it is bound to this corpse, and with it must as it were waste away and die, as Hortensius said before St. Augustine. Note secondly: Death is the effect and, as it were, the daughter of sin: for sin begets its own executioner, and guilt brings forth punishment, crime is the parent and cause of death. Whence St. James, chapter 1, verse 15: "Concupiscence," he says, "when it hath conceived, bringeth forth sin; but sin, when it is completed, generateth death." Where observe: the mother of sin is habitual concupiscence itself, the father is the free will itself; the seed of the mother is the titillation and pleasure which concupiscence instils; the seed of the father is the consent of the will in the act of willing; the offspring is sin in the very act of being; this offspring is either imperfect, as an embryo and incomplete foetus; such is venial sin committed through lack of deliberation; or it is offspring altogether formed; such is mortal sin deliberated and consummated by the consent of the will; but the grandson of this father and mother is death, both present and future and the eternal death of hell. Hence Job 18, 13, it is said: "Let death, the firstborn, consume his arms (of the impious)." You will ask, what is meant here by "death, the firstborn"? St. Gregory understands pride, because it is itself the beginning of sin; for it was the first death of the angel and of the soul of man. Secondly, Philip the presbyter and Bede, in Job chapter 18, understand the devil, because he himself brought death into the world, and he himself is the inventor of his own death. Thus death is taken in the Apocalypse 20, verse 14. Thirdly, Lyra understands premature and untimely death. Fourthly, the Hebrews understand the disease which will first seize the impious. Vatablus and Titelmannus understand a most grave and lethal disease. Fifthly, subtly Pineda and Mercerus understand death not common, but most bitter, disastrous and violent, such as is the death of youths and the rich: as in Isaiah 14, verse 30, "the firstborn of the poor" are called the poorest. But the more savory, more pious and more genuine sense appears to be that which the Chaldean gives, so that death properly so called, the daughter of the sinner himself and of sin, is called the firstborn, that is the primeval daughter, the princess and queen: because she, as it were by the right of primogeniture, in the kingdom of sin, as of her father and his heir, succeeded and dominates: for "firstborn" is referred to that one, namely the impious, and to the impiety included in the impious, whose firstborn daughter Baldal in Job calls death, and he wishes that, just as impiety has dominated the impious, so death, which is the daughter and heir of impiety, may dominate him, and that entirely, so that as widely as the kingdom of impiety extends, so widely may the kingdom of death extend, as if to say: Death, which was first brought into the world through sin, and therefore as it were the firstborn daughter of sin, succeeded as princess in the kingdom of sin and rules, that death, I say, devour him, namely the impious, and like a viper consume its mother, that is sin and the sinner. Whence the following verse, thus explaining it, adds: "Let destruction tread upon him as a king." Thus "firstborn" is taken in Psalm 88, 23: "And I," says God, "will make him (Solomon, and his antitype Christ) the firstborn, exalted above the kings of the earth," as if to say: God: Solomon and Christ in Israel and my kingdom will succeed, and will rule most widely, as my firstborn, who am King of kings and Lord of lords, sons. Truly did he say: "There are three powers, the male, Mars, death; but the most powerful is death. For as Mars tames the male, so death tames Mars." Finally, morally, see here how great an evil sin is, which generates so many diseases and death itself, both present and eternal. Do you wish to know what sin is? Behold only the single sin of Adam, and consider how many millions of men's diseases, famines, hardships, deaths, this one sin has brought forth; how many, both small children and adults, are damned because of it; that the Son of God had to die to expiate it; and you will see how great an evil is one mortal sin, and you will say, when pleasure solicits you to sin: I will not buy death and eternal punishment for so small a price. IN WHICH ALL HAVE SINNED. — "In which," supply, not in sin, but in one man. For the Greek hō is masculine, but hamartia is feminine. Thus St. Augustine, in the book On the Merits of Sins, chapter X, who also adds the reason: "Because," he says, "all men were that one man, namely Adam;" which understand, not formally, but originally, radically, seminally and representatively, because namely all men in that first man, as in a root, parent and principle, were contained, reckoned and comprehended, and what Adam did, all his posterity are reckoned to have done. For Adam as father and prince represented all his posterity, just as a king represents a kingdom, and a magistrate represents a city. Thus Origen, Chrysostom, Theophylactus, Oecumenius and everywhere the Greek and Latin Fathers. Wherefore wrongly Erasmus, Theodoretus and the Pelagians render to eph' hō as "inasmuch as," "in so far as," namely that in Adam all sinned. Which interpretation St. Augustine, in book VI Against Julian, XV, says is new and false. Nor is it surprising, since epi with the dative signifies in; for at Hebrews 9, 17, in the versions, it is the same, according to Erasmus, as "in the dead." Similar is here verse 14. Thus the Greeks say, eph' hippō, eph' hymin, in a horse, in you. And it is evident to one reading Paul and Luke, that they use epi, sic, en indifferently for in. Indeed epi with the dative also signifies cause, condition and covenant. Thus Xenophon: "these things," he says, "to do eph' tō kerdei," that is to do these things for the sake of gain. Thus everywhere the Greeks say, epi tō misthō, that is for wages, by covenant of wages. Thus likewise here to eph' hō can be taken, as if Paul said: By whose, namely Adam's, cause and covenant, which he himself had made with God, all sinned. And although you translate and read, "inasmuch as all sinned," still from this original sin is sufficiently gathered; for how did all men, even infants, sin, except through one man and their father, namely Adam? Note first: Just as in actual sin the act of sin passes away, but leaves behind habitual sin, namely a stain on the soul, which is not something physical, but a certain moral turpitude and as it were a mark and infamy left from the sin committed, namely it is a moral aversion from God, and an offense of God, from which man is morally reckoned averse from God, and God's enemy, and God is hostile to him, and from which he is denominated a sinner, and is guilty before God, and liable to God's wrath and deserving of punishment; just as one who offends a king by some act of rebellion, after the act is still reckoned rebellious, an enemy, guilty, and subject to the king's wrath and vengeance, until the king forgives him: so original sin is partly actual, namely it is the act of Adam's disobedience, by which he ate the forbidden fruit; partly however it is habitual, namely it is a stain proper to each man, which each contracts by being born from that first sin of Adam. Whence Albert Pighius and Catharinus err, while they wished original sin not to inhere in each, but only Adam's first sin itself to be imputed to each for guilt and punishment. For this error is sufficiently refuted from what is said in verse 12. Where note, according to this opinion of Pighius concerning Adam's sin imputed to us, in like manner the heretics teach that Christ's justice similarly does not inhere in us, but only is imputed. But from the very opinion of Luther, Calvin and others everywhere of the Novations, we rather gather and conclude the contrary in this way: Adam truly poured into us concupiscence and sin, as the Novations themselves feel and teach; therefore and in like manner, Christ truly and properly pours into us inherent justice. Note second: That act of disobedience of Adam already mentioned was partly personal and proper, and inhering in Adam himself, and this was forgiven to him through penance, as is said in Wisdom 10, 2; partly it was general and common to all of human nature, and all of Adam's posterity. For in that act with Adam actually sinning, contained in him as in a head, source and seminary, and as it were enclosed, they originally committed the same sin: for what Adam did and ate, we are reckoned to have done and eaten; because our will was placed by God the supreme Lord of all in the will of Adam, as the common parent of all: thus therefore Adam sinning infected all of us with the same sin. And thus original sin is voluntary to us by another's will: it is said however also to be proper, both because Adam's will is reckoned to be ours and proper, and because to each properly inheres its habitual stain, which the act of Adam left behind and poured into it. Note thirdly: This act of Adam, not as personal, but as common to the whole human race and nature, namely insofar as by the same act we originally sinned in Adam and through Adam when we did not yet exist, is the reason that, when we are born from Adam, turned away from God and stained, we are born sinners. For frivolous is that commentary which the Master of the Sentences feigns in II, dist. 31, namely that a certain morbid quality adhered to the flesh and seed of Adam, which then infected and daily successively infects the souls of his offspring and descendants with original sin. For a bodily quality cannot produce spiritual sin in the soul. Much greater is the error of Tertullian, thinking that the soul of the son is from traducianism, that is, drawn and produced from the soul of the parent, and thus simultaneously draws original sin from it; for, to pass over that this is against philosophy and condemned in the Lateran Council under Leo X, sess. VIII, where it is defined that individual souls are created and infused into individual men by God, this opinion of Tertullian is opposed by the fact that the soul of the son draws this sin from the parent, even then when the parent has been justified from original sin and every other sin: how therefore can this sin be drawn from the parent's soul, in which it no longer exists, to the soul of the son. Hence note fourthly: It is one thing to sin in Adam, another thing for the sin of Adam to pass into all, or for all to contract sin from Adam: for that was actual, but this is habitual, and a sin proper and inherent to each, original sin, as I have said. When therefore Paul says, in whom, namely Adam, all have sinned, the sense is that the act of Adam, by which he himself sinned, is imputed to all and is reckoned to have been the proper act of all, whence it comes to pass that each son of Adam draws the necessity of this sin from Adam, together with his nature, and necessarily, when he is born, is born a sinner, unless he is anticipated by the grace and mercy of God. Thus the Blessed Virgin sinned in Adam and incurred this necessity of contracting original sin: but original sin itself in fact she did not contract, nor did she have: because she was anticipated by the grace of God at the first instant of her conception, which excluded all sin from her.
5:13
13. UNTIL THE LAW INDEED SIN WAS IN THE WORLD. — Note that sin here means any sin whatsoever, namely first original sin and any actual sin which followed from it, which is the kingdom of sin. Here the Apostle proves what he said, namely that all men sinned in Adam, and thus proves original sin itself. But he proves this by this argument: before the law was given, sin and the guilt and corruption of sin was in the world: for although sin then was not imputed, that is, was scarcely reckoned, scarcely esteemed by men, following only their nature and their concupiscence, and not having the law which would show the foulness of sin, nevertheless that sin then was in the world is clearly demonstrated by the very death of all men: for the effect, penalty and inseparable companion of sin is death. Since therefore death even before the law reigned and extended itself to all men, it follows that sin also, which is the cause of death, reigned in all men and spread itself. You will object and except that before the law there was indeed sin in the world, but not original, but actual, which each one had done and committed. The Apostle dissolves and destroys this exception, saying:
5:14
14. BUT DEATH REIGNED FROM ADAM UNTO MOSES, EVEN OVER THEM ALSO WHO HAVE NOT SINNED AFTER THE SIMILITUDE OF THE TRANSGRESSION OF ADAM. — That is to say, Before Moses and the law, just as death, so also this sin was common even to those who have not sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, that is to those who have not sinned in act, as Adam sinned by transgressing the law, namely to infants. Thus Theophylactus, Theodoretus, Anselmus, Chrysostom and St. Augustine, book I On the Merits of Sins, XI; it follows therefore that original sin was in infants, and in the world even before the law. For why were infants then equally as now dead, unless on account of sin, not actual, which they could not commit, but original, which they contracted from Adam? Otherwise Toletus explains this passage, that is to say, Paul says: There was indeed actual sin in the world before the law, but it was not imputed unto a certain punishment, for example death. For this is usually established only through law, not natural, but positive divine or human law, which did not yet exist then: therefore since we see that before the law God had established a certain punishment for sin, namely death, for all indeed even before the law died on account of sin, hence it follows, and death itself indicates, that before the law there was some sin in the world, not actual, as I have already proved, therefore original, to which God justly decreed and inflicted a certain punishment of death. But this sense seems too remote, obscure and involved. Note = "who have not sinned": for thus it must be read with the Greeks and Latins. For Origen and Ambrose wrongly remove the negation, "not," and read affirmatively, "who have sinned." AFTER THE SIMILITUDE OF THE TRANSGRESSION OF ADAM. — St. Chrysostom refers these words to "death reigned," that is to say "death reigned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam," that is death reigned over us, because we are born similar to Adam transgressing, namely sinners. Secondly, others explain it thus, that is to say, Death reigned even over those who have not sinned against any positive law given to them by God, as Adam sinned, but only sinned against the law of nature. Thirdly, more plainly, as I have said, this similitude of the transgression of Adam consists in the act and actual sin, by which Adam sinned, transgressing the law given to him by God. The sense therefore is, death reigned over those "who have not sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam," that is death reigned even over those who have not sinned in act, as Adam did, namely over infants; for from the death of infants the Apostle rightly infers their sin, which since it cannot be actual, it follows that it must be original contracted from Adam. ADAM, WHO IS THE FORM OF HIM THAT WAS TO COME. — That is to say, Such as Adam was, such sons he begat after him, namely sinners, mortal, miserable, says St. Augustine, book I On the Merits of Sins, chapter XI. Secondly and more genuinely, thus expound it: Adam was the form, type and figure of Christ to come, that is to say, Each of them, namely both Christ and Adam, was our father, but in opposite ways, as St. Augustine rightly shows, book II On Marriage and Concupiscence, chapter XXVII. For first, just as Adam alone without the intercourse of male and female, from earth not cursed, but pure and whole was formed; so Christ was born from the pure Virgin alone. Secondly, just as Adam alone by sinning lost all his posterity, so Christ alone by dying repaired it. Hence certain learned and wise men rightly observed, the reason why God placed our will, merit and demerit in the will of Adam, apart from the supreme dominion and freedom of God, by which He can do and establish anything, was this: namely that Adam in this way might be the type of Christ, in whose hand and will God wished to place our salvation, so that He might merit for us grace and glory, just as Adam merited for us guilt and punishment. For before Adam sinned or was created, God from eternity by conditioned foreknowledge knew and foresaw all future things, and according to it absolutely willed and decreed that Adam and all things of Adam should be on account of Christ, and should be the type of Christ and of things to be done by Christ. For God wished to show in Christ all His wisdom and glory, and therefore He established and decreed that Christ should be the principle, exemplar and end of all things, not only of the elect, but also of His works, as Colossians 1, 15 and seq. There was therefore not only in the very execution, but also in the very divine decree itself a mutual interdependence of Adam and Christ. For Adam would not have been the father of all men in such a way that he could transmit either his justice or his sin to them, unless he himself at the same time had been a type and figure of Christ, who was to be the parent of all the sons of God: nor conversely would Christ have been incarnate and born into the world unless Adam had sinned and lost us, as the truer and more common opinion of theologians holds. Note here that Sacred Scripture sometimes uses allegories in a contrary sense. Thus Hosea, chapter I and III, was commanded by God to take a fornicatress as a wife, so that he might signify that the sons of Israel would commit fornication, that is, abandoning God, the husband of the Synagogue, would cling to idols and worship them: where the pious deed of Hosea and his legitimate marriage with a fornicatress signifies the impious idolatry of the Jews. In like manner, many Fathers explain the allegory of David's adultery through the chaste love of Christ, namely that David was permitted by God to commit adultery with Bathsheba, so that he might signify that Christ would be inflamed with love for the Church gathered from the Gentiles and idolaters. St. Augustine assigns the reason for the similarity and dissimilarity in book XXII Against Faustus, chapter XXVII, and St. Ambrose in the Apology of David, chapter III. And Angelomus, Eucherius and Rupertus bring forward a similar interpretation in book II of Kings, chapter XI. Thus therefore here also Adam is said to be a form, or type of Christ in genus, not in species, because Christ and Adam were constituted in a contrary manner: the latter was the parent of death, Christ truly of life and salvation. But in the very contrariety there is a certain similarity of proportion and propagation, as I showed a little before. Others explain it thus, as if Paul said: Much more, that is with much greater power, strength and vigor Christ bestowed his gifts upon us, than Adam took them away, because it is more difficult to build up than to destroy. Hence the Doctors rightly infer with St. Leo, sermon 12 On the Passion, that the value of the merits and satisfaction of Christ far exceeds the demerits of Adam; and this not by divine acceptance, but by strict justice and the value of the works themselves, which they had through themselves, from the dignity of the person working and suffering: for thus the sin of Adam, through its own unworthiness and gravity, by the highest equity and justice merited the wrath of God and present and eternal punishments. Note: For "in plures," in Greek it is εἰς τοὺς πολλούς, "in many," that is in all already mentioned, as if to say: Just as Adam harmed all, so Christ benefited all, but more than he harmed. Thus Theophylactus.
5:15
15. BUT NOT AS THE OFFENCE, SO ALSO THE GIFT. — "Offence," in Greek παράπτωμα. Thus Paul calls the very fall, ruin and transgression of Adam: from which, as from a cause, flows the effect, namely ἁμαρτία, that is original sin, which is a stain and guilt adhering in each one born from Adam. To this offence and transgression he opposes χάριν, δωρεάν, χάρισμα, that is grace, donation and the gratuitous benefit of Christ, namely his redemption, satisfaction, merit of grace and remission of sins; from which, as from a cause, flows the effect τὸ δικαίωμα and δικαίωσις, that is the gift of grace and justice adhering to us. Secondly, the offence of Adam is called παράπτωμα, as if to say: Not a fall, but as it were a fall, not a ruin, but almost a ruin, not a lapse, but a transgression. For the preposition παρά diminishes the thing to which it is joined in composition, as if to say: The fall and ruin of Adam was small and slight compared with the reparation and grace of Christ, because the goods and benefits of Christ are far more powerful and efficacious than the sin of Adam, just as the poverty of Iris compared with the riches of Croesus, who was preparing to relieve and enrich her, is small or nothing. IF BY THE OFFENCE OF ONE MANY DIED: MUCH MORE THE GRACE OF GOD AND THE GIFT IN GRACE (through grace) OF ONE MAN JESUS CHRIST HATH ABOUNDED UNTO MANY. — "Many," that is all: yet he says rather "many" than "all," so that he might signify the multitude of posterity, because all can be few, says St. Augustine, as if Paul said: If through the offence of one Adam all his posterity incurred the guilt and penalty of death, both present and eternal; know that the benefit which Christ exhibited to us was far greater; for Christ bestowed far greater goods and gifts upon us through his grace than Adam took away, namely so many graces and gifts of the Holy Spirit, which Christ bestowed upon the Apostles, Martyrs, Doctors, Hermits, Bishops, Virgins and other sons of the New Testament, which Adam lacked, and finally immortality itself and its greatest, most numerous and most diverse gifts. See St. Chrysostom here, on the treasure of Christ's graces.
5:16
16. AND NOT AS BY ONE SIN (supply, Adam infected all), SO ALSO THE GIFT, — supply, of Christ from one sin alone frees, but from many, which posterity has added and will add to Adam's sin. Thus Theophylactus. This is the second dissimilarity between Adam and Christ. The Greek texts have ὡς δι' ἑνὸς ἁμαρτήσαντος, "as through one sinning", supply, death came into the world: and thus Augustine reads it, book I On the Merits of Sins; but the sense is the same. FOR JUDGMENT INDEED FROM ONE INTO CONDEMNATION, BUT GRACE FROM MANY OFFENCES INTO JUSTIFICATION. — Judgment, in Greek κρίμα, that is, guilt, namely flowed from one sin of Adam, into κατάκριμα, that is, into condemnation: so that all, even infants, were liable to condemnation, that is, to the penalty of loss, even if not of sense, as most Scholastics teach. On the contrary, the benefit and grace of Christ proceeded from many offences unto justification, so that namely not from one, but from many, indeed from all sins He would justify us. Paul opposes χάρισμα and κρίμα, that is, grace and guilt: again δικαίωμα and κατάκριμα, that is, justification and condemnation. Hence St. Augustine, book II On Marriage and Concupiscence, chapter XXVII, teaches that original sin suffices for condemnation.
5:17
17. MUCH MORE RECEIVING THE ABUNDANCE OF GRACE, AND OF THE GIFT, AND OF JUSTICE, SHALL REIGN IN LIFE THROUGH ONE JESUS CHRIST. — "In life shall reign," that is to say, Adam brought in the reign of death, but Christ more eminently, and with grace, justice and all good things more abundantly brought in the reign of life, in which He made us kings, so that we may obtain here the divine life of grace, and afterwards without death eternal and glorious life in the heavens. Thus Theophylactus. Note: Paul does not say, "life reigned," as he said, "death reigned," because it sounds more sweetly and gloriously, the justified shall reign in life through Christ, than if he had said: Life shall reign in the justified through Christ. Excellently St. Bernard, epistle 190 to Pope Innocent against the errors of Peter Abelard, who taught that Christ is our teacher, not our redeemer: "If grace," he says, "am I sold, am I not redeemed freely? But if he should say: Your father sold you, I will answer: But my brother redeemed me. Why not justice from elsewhere, since guilt is from elsewhere? One who made the sinner, another who justifies from sin. One in seed, another in blood. But let justice be whose it is: what is that to you? So be it. But let guilt also be whose it is: what is that to me?"
5:18
18. AS THROUGH ONE OFFENCE UPON ALL MEN (supply, guilt passed) INTO CONDEMNATION: SO ALSO THROUGH ONE (Christ's) JUSTICE (in Greek δικαίωμα, that is, merit, which is the cause of our justification and justice) UPON ALL MEN, — supply, the gift and benefit of Christ passed, namely upon all who spiritually descend from Christ, and are born again in Him by baptism. For that Paul speaks properly of justifying grace, not prevenient grace, is evident both from the following verse, and because Christ is opposed to Adam, who is the efficacious cause of damnation to all born from him, just as Christ is the efficacious cause of justification and immortality to all born again from Him. Note: δικαίωμα, that is, the merit of Christ, the Apostle here distinguishes from δικαιώσει, that is, from justification, and from δικαιώματι, that is, from justice. For this third is in us, the first truly is in Christ, the second however effectively indeed is in Christ, as in the agent, but subjectively is in us, as in those receiving it. That this is so is evident from the opposition of τοῦ δικαιώματος and τοῦ παραπτώματος. For παράπτωμα the Apostle calls the offence and the fault of Adam transfused into posterity: therefore δικαίωμα opposed to it he calls the obedience and justice of Christ in his posterity, namely in believers transfused. Whence what he calls δικαίωμα in this place, he calls ὑπακοή in verse 13, that is, obedience. Read verse 19, which explains this. INTO JUSTIFICATION OF LIFE, — by which from the death of sin we are recalled to the life of grace and glory. It is evident from verse 16: thus St. Augustine, book On the Merits of Sins, chapter XV. Toletus explains this otherwise. For he thinks "justification of life" is called here the action and operation by which God from justice and the merit of Christ justifies all men, even the reprobate, raising them from death to life perpetually enduring, not by their merit and justice, but by Christ's, as I said; yet "justification of life" is never taken thus.
5:19
19. JUST AS THROUGH THE DISOBEDIENCE OF ONE MAN (Adam) MANY WERE MADE SINNERS (all of Adam's descendants), SO ALSO THROUGH THE OBEDIENCE OF ONE (Christ) MANY SHALL BE MADE JUST, — namely all those who are reborn in Christ through faith and grace. Note here what and how great was the fruit of one obedience and one disobedience. From this passage the Doctors rightly infer and conclude in this manner: In Adam there was true disobedience, therefore also in Christ there was true and properly so-called obedience, which subjects itself to the precept of a Superior and conforms to it, and consequently a precept was given to Christ by the Father of dying, and thus of redeeming us. For this was the object of Christ's obedience, to which Christ obeyed. Note: The Apostle here brings forth a threefold antithesis and dissimilarity between Adam and Christ. First, Adam lost all, Christ repaired all. Second, Adam transmitted one sin to his descendants, Christ frees them from all actual sins. Third, Adam propagated one evil, which cannot in any way be intended, namely original sin; Christ poured forth an abundance of graces. To these add that the grace of Christ is more abundant and more powerful than was the sin of Adam. Fourth, because the sin of Adam brought upon us only the punishment of loss; Christ frees us both from the punishment of loss and from the punishment of sense, which is owed for actual sins. Again from Adam we draw concupiscence, but through Christ it has become matter both of great struggle and of victory and triumph: and Christ will root it out through glory in heaven. Fifth, through Adam grace was lost, by which man could persevere; through Christ a more frequent and more abundant grace is given, so that in such great weakness, among so many enemies, he may stand stronger and persevere in act. Thus St. Augustine, throughout the whole book On the Good of Perseverance. Sixth, through Adam all die temporally; through Christ we shall rise to life both of soul and also of body, immortal and glorious. Seventh, not the sin of Adam, but the grace of Christ extends to the Blessed Virgin, who is the sea of graces, and has more grace than all men together. Pererius, Suarez and others add that Christ's grace extended also to the angels and that they were justified through the merits of Christ, to whom the sin of Adam could not reach. Eighth, although Adam actually infects more than are reborn from Christ: nevertheless Christ's grace as to sufficiency and oblation extends to all, not only to those born from Adam, but to all who could in any way be produced, for example if God were to create them anew. Ninth, through Adam we were reduced as it were to a state of pure nature; through Christ we are elevated to a state more spiritual and more sublime than that in which Adam was created, and to a life wholly heavenly. Tenth, through Adam we were made like beasts, through Christ like angels, indeed our nature in Christ and in the Blessed Virgin has been exalted above all the choirs of angels. Eleventh, Adam deprived us of the tree of life; Christ gives bread which comes down from heaven, and gives eternal life, namely himself wholly, God namely and man, he gives himself to us as food in the Eucharist. Twelfth, Adam deprived us of the grace of original justice; Christ gives an abundance of graces and virtues: first, because he gives virtues which would not have existed in the state of innocence, namely patience, penance, martyrdom, virginity, apostleship and religious virtues. Second, of these and all others he gives a greater abundance, intensity and continual increase than would have existed in the state of innocence. Note secondly: Just as in Adam all sinned, so in Christ all are justified, that is we have justly satisfied for sins and merited justice; but just as to contract original sin it is necessary to be born naturally from Adam, so to participate in the justice of Christ, it is necessary to be born from him spiritually through baptism. Note thirdly, from this it follows against heretics that, just as the disobedience and sin of Adam really inheres in us, not merely is imputed to us, so also, indeed even more, the grace of Christ inheres in us, not merely is imputed to us: otherwise indeed the sin of Adam would be far more efficacious than the grace of Christ, which could not take away sin but only hide it.
5:20
20. BUT THE LAW ENTERED IN, THAT SIN MIGHT ABOUND. — Note the word "entered in," that is to say, by the way, and as it were stealthily for a brief time, namely until the coming of the Gospel, the law entered into the world, so that it might be to the Jews as it were a pedagogue unto Christ. The Greek παρεισῆλθεν signifies, as Budaeus says, to creep in and to deceive by entering and insinuating itself. Thus here the law as it were latently insinuated itself, and, as our translator rendered it, "entered in," directly indeed for this purpose, that it might restrain the dissolute morals of men, and lead them to Christ, who would heal them: but indirectly to that which follows, namely, "that sin might abound," that is to say, whence it came to pass that sin abounded. For the little word "that" signifies consequence, not cause. "For we always strive after what is forbidden, and desire what is denied." See chapter 24. "The law," says St. Augustine in Psalm 102, "was given for this reason, that as sin increased, the proud might be humbled, the humbled might confess, the confessing might be healed." The same, tract. III in John: "The law," he says, "threatened, it did not help; it commanded, it did not heal; it showed the disease, it did not remove it." Wherefore less genuinely St. Ambrose, epistle 71 to Irenaeus, "the law entered in," he says, because as it were by chance it entered, so that it might succeed the natural law, which had been obscured in the minds of men. For the Apostle made no mention of the natural law here, nor was the law of Moses given for the sake of restoring that alone. You will say: The law was asked for and received in public with such great pomp on Sinai, therefore it did not enter stealthily. I answer: I deny the consequence, because God led the Hebrews out of Egypt in the middle of the night, as it were stealthily, into the desert of Sinai, and there promulgated the law to those expecting nothing of the sort. Others translate, "the law moreover entered in," that is to say, Besides the disease contracted from Adam, the law was added, which increased the disease. The Apostle meets an objection here. For someone will say: You said, Paul, in verse 13: "Until the law sin was in the world": therefore after the law, and through the Mosaic law, sin was taken away: for what other purpose was the law given? Paul answers, that sin was so far from being taken away through the law, that rather through it it was increased, by the fault indeed of men, but taking occasion from the law, which multiplied precepts, and yet did not give to weak men the strength to fulfill them. The Apostle notes here three states of the world: the first was from Adam to Moses; the second from Moses to Christ; the third from Christ to the end of the world: in the first sin and death reigned; in the second the law, which increased sin; in the third grace, which took away sin and death. Whence the Apostle here as it were institutes a comedy divided into three scenes, and by prosopopoeia, to each scene its own person, as it were a choragus, assigns, which as it were as a king dominates and reigns: three therefore kings here, who conflict with one another, are sin, law, grace, or Adam, Moses and Christ; each of whom had his own kingdom and time and space of reigning. Beautifully St. Augustine compares four states of man with one another, lib. LXXXIII Questions, Question LXIX: "The first," he says, "is action before the law, the second under the law, the third under grace, the fourth in peace. Before the law action is, when we are ignorant of sin, and we follow carnal concupiscences. Under the law is action, when now we are prohibited from sin, and yet overcome by its habit we sin. The third action is, when we are not overcome by the pleasure of evil habit, but through grace we resist it. The fourth action, when there is absolutely nothing in man that resists the spirit. In the first action therefore, which is before the law, there is no struggle with pleasure. In the second, which is under the law, we struggle, but we are overcome. In the third we struggle and we overcome. In the fourth we do not struggle, but we rest in perfect and eternal peace." To be noted here is the teaching of St. Thomas on the threefold end of the law with respect to three kinds of men. "Concerning the end of the law," he says, "it should be known that among the Jewish people there were three kinds of men, just as in any other people: namely, the hardened, that is, sinners and rebels, those making progress, and the perfect. Therefore, as regards the hardened, the law was given as a scourge, and as regards the moral precepts, to the observance of which they were compelled by the threat of punishment, as is evident from Leviticus 20, and as regards the ceremonial precepts, which were multiplied for this reason, that it might not be lawful for them to add any worship of foreign gods, Ezekiel 20: In a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, and in poured out fury will I reign over you. But to those making progress, who are called mediocre, the law was a pedagogue, according to that in Galatians 3: The law was our pedagogue unto Christ. And this as regards the ceremonial precepts, by which they were advanced to justice. But to the perfect, as regards the ceremonial precepts indeed as a sign, according to that in Ezekiel 20: My sabbaths I gave them, that they might be a sign between me, etc. But as regards the moral precepts truly as a consolation, according to that which Paul says in chapter VII: I am delighted with the law of God, according to the inward man." WHERE SIN ABOUNDED, GRACE DID MORE ABOUND. — "Where," that is, after sin prevailed in the world, by occasion of the law; after the world had come to the height of evils and sins in the state of the law, then immediately came Christ, as it were the most powerful and most merciful physician, who showed the abundance and efficacy of his grace in healing and abolishing sin and the kingdom of sin.
5:21
21. THAT AS SIN REIGNED UNTO DEATH (drawing namely the sinner into bodily and eternal death), SO ALSO GRACE MAY REIGN THROUGH JUSTICE UNTO LIFE ETERNAL, — that namely through justice we may attain eternal life, to which justice gives right, as if to say, The grace of Christ abounded to this end, that the kingdom of death and sin being destroyed, the kingdom of justice and eternal life might be established and spread far and wide through Christ. See here two kingdoms, one of death, in which Adam and Adam's sin reigned; the other of life, in which Christ and Christ's grace reign, which first overthrew the kingdom of death. Between these two the law intervened, as if to make an interregnum, but in vain; for the law rather increased the kingdom of sin than suspended it. Whence it was necessary that Christ should come, who by his grace would root out the kingdom of sin and death. Most excellently St. Augustine, in Sentences, no. 194: "The rational soul is the mistress of its body, which will not rule the inferior well unless it has wholly subjected itself to God in the submission of charity."
Machine translation from the Latin, not reviewed.
5:1
Postquam apostolus ostendit necessitatem gratiae Christi, quia sine ea nec cognitio veritatis gentibus, nec circumcisio et lex Iudaeis profuerunt ad salutem, hic incipit commendare virtutem gratiae. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ostendit quae bona per gratiam consequamur; secundo, a quibus malis per eam liberemur, ibi propterea sicut per unum hominem, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo proponit modum perveniendi, seu viam qua venimus ad gratiam; secundo ostendit bona quae per gratiam consequimur, ibi et gloriamur in spe gloriae, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo exhortatur ad debitum gratiae usum; secundo ostendit nobis gratiae aditum, ibi per quem accessum, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: dictum est quod fides reputabitur omnibus ad iustitiam credentibus resurrectionem Christi, quae est causa nostrae iustificationis. Iustificati igitur ex fide, inquantum scilicet per fidem resurrectionis effectum eius participamus, habeamus pacem ad Deum, scilicet subiiciendo nos et obediendo ei. Iob XXII, 21: acquiesce igitur ei et habeto pacem. Iob IX, 4: quis restitit ei, et pacem habuit? Et hoc per Iesum Christum dominum nostrum, qui nos ad istam pacem perduxit. Eph. II, 14: ipse est pax nostra. Unde subdit per quem, Christum accessum habemus, scilicet tamquam per mediatorem. Tim. II, 5: mediator Dei et hominum, et cetera. Eph. II, 18: per ipsum accessum habemus ambo in uno spiritu ad patrem. Accessum, inquam, in gratiam istam, id est, in statum gratiae. Io. I, 17: gratia et veritas per Iesum Christum facta est. In qua, id est, per quam gratiam, non solum resurreximus a peccatis, sed etiam stamus, fixi et erecti per affectum in caelestibus. Ps. CXX, 21: stantes erant pedes nostri. Et iterum: nos autem surreximus, et erecti sumus. Et hoc per fidem, per quam, scilicet, gratiam consequamur, non quia fides praecedat gratiam, cum potius per gratiam sit fides. Eph. II, 8: gratia estis salvati per fidem, scilicet, quia primus effectus gratiae in nobis est fides. Deinde cum dicit gloriamur in spe gloriae, etc. ostendit quae bona nobis per gratiam provenerunt. Primo dicit quod per gratiam habemus gloriam spei; secundo, quod per gratiam habemus gloriam Dei, ibi non solum autem, et cetera. Circa primum tria facit. Primo ostendit magnitudinem spei, in qua gloriamur; secundo, eius vehementiam, ibi non solum autem, et cetera. Tertio, eius firmitatem, ibi spes autem non confundit, et cetera.
5:2
Magnitudo autem spei consideratur ex magnitudine rei speratae, quam ponit dicens et gloriamur in spe gloriae filiorum Dei, id est ex hoc quod speramus nos adepturos gloriam filiorum Dei. Per gratiam enim Christi adepti sumus spiritum adoptionis filiorum Dei, ut dicitur infra c. VIII, 15, et Sap. V, 5: ecce quomodo computati sunt inter filios Dei. Filiis autem debetur haereditas patris, infra VIII, 17: si autem filii et haeredes. Haec autem haereditas est gloria quam Deus habet in seipso. Iob XL, v. 4: si habes brachium ut Deus, et cetera. Et huiusmodi spes indita est nobis per Christum. I Petr. I, 3 s.: regeneravit nos in spem vivam, per resurrectionem Iesu Christi ex mortuis in haereditatem incorruptibilem, et cetera. Et haec gloria, quae in futuro in nobis complebitur, interim nunc in nobis inchoatur per spem. Infra VIII, 24: spe salvi facti sumus. Ps. V, 12: gloriabuntur in te omnes qui diligunt nomen tuum. Deinde cum dicit non solum autem, etc., ostendit vehementiam huius spei. Qui enim vehementer aliquid sperat, libenter sustinet propter illud etiam difficilia et amara, sicut infirmus si vehementer sperat sanitatem, libenter bibit potionem amaram ut sanetur per ipsam. Signum ergo vehementis spei quam habemus propter Christum est quod non solum gloriamur ex spe futurae gloriae, sed etiam de malis quae pro ipsa patimur, unde dicit non solum autem gloriamur, scilicet in spe gloriae, sed etiam gloriamur in tribulationibus, per quas ad gloriam pervenimus. Act. XIV, 21: per multas tribulationes oportet nos introire in regnum caelorum. Iac. I, 2: omne gaudium existimate, fratres mei, cum in tentationes varias incideritis. Et causam ostendit consequenter, dicens scientes, et cetera.
5:3
Ubi quatuor per ordinem ponit, quorum primum est tribulatio, de qua dicitur quod tribulatio patientiam operatur; non quidem sic quod tribulatio sit eius causa effectiva, sed quia tribulatio est materia et occasio exercendi patientiae actum. Infra XII, 12: in tribulatione patientes. Secundo ponit patientiae effectum, cum dicit patientia probationem. Eccli. II, 5: in igne probatur aurum et argentum: homines vero receptibiles in camino humiliationis. Manifestum est enim quod detrimentum alicuius rei de facili sustinemus, propter rem quam magis amamus. Unde si aliquis in rebus corporalibus et temporalibus patienter sustinet propter bona consequenda aeterna, sufficienter ex hoc probatur quod talis plus amet bona aeterna quam temporalia. Sed contra id quod hic dicitur est illud Iac. I, 3: probatio fidei vestrae patientiam operatur. Dicendum est autem quod probatio dupliciter potest intelligi. Uno modo secundum quod est in probato, et sic probatio est ipsa tribulatio per quam homo probatur. Unde idem est dictu quod tribulatio patientiam operatur, et quod tribulatio probat patientiam. Alio modo accipitur probatio pro probatum esse. Et ita accipitur hic quod patientia probationem operatur, quia ex hoc quod homo patienter tribulationem sustinet, redditur iam probatus.
5:4
Tertio, subdit tertium, dicens probatio vero spem, scilicet operatur, quia scilicet, per hoc quod aliquis iam probatus est, potest de eo spes haberi et ab ipso et ab aliis quod ad haereditatem Dei admittatur. Sap. III, 5: Deus probavit illos et invenit illos dignos se. Sic igitur de primo ad ultimum patet, quod tribulatio viam parat ad spem. Unde si aliquis vehementer gloriatur de spe, consequens est, ut de ipsis tribulationibus glorietur.
5:5
Deinde cum dicit spes autem non confundit, ostendit huiusmodi spei firmitatem. Et primo ponit eam, dicens spes autem, scilicet haec qua speramus gloriam filiorum Dei, non confundit, id est, non deficit, nisi homo ei deficiat. Ille enim dicitur a spe sua confundi, qui deficit ab eo quod sperat, Ps. XXX, 2: in te, domine, speravi, non confundar in aeternum. Eccle. II, 11: nullus speravit in domino, et confusus est. Secundo, ibi quia charitas Dei, etc., ponit certitudinis spei duplex argumentum, quorum primum est ex dono spiritus sancti, secundum ex morte Christi, ibi ut quid enim Christus, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: ex hoc possumus scire quod spes non confundit quia charitas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris, per spiritum sanctum qui datus est nobis. Charitas Dei autem dupliciter accipi potest. Uno modo pro charitate qua diligit nos Deus, Ier. XXXI, 3: charitate perpetua dilexi te, alio modo potest dici charitas Dei, qua nos Deum diligimus, infra VIII, 38 s.: certus sum quod neque mors neque vita separabit nos a charitate Dei. Utraque autem charitas Dei in cordibus nostris diffunditur per spiritum sanctum qui datus est nobis. Spiritum enim sanctum, qui est amor patris et filii, dari nobis, est nos adduci ad participationem amoris, qui est spiritus sanctus, a qua quidem participatione efficimur Dei amatores. Et hoc quod ipsum amamus, signum est, quod ipse nos amet. Prov. VIII, 17: ego diligentes me diligo. Non quasi nos primo dilexerimus Deum, sed quoniam ipse prior dilexit nos, ut dicitur I Io. IV, 10. Dicitur autem charitas, qua nos diligit, in cordibus nostris diffusa esse, quia est in cordibus nostris patenter ostensa per donum sancti spiritus nobis impressum. Io. III, v. 24: in hoc scimus, quoniam manet in nobis Deus, et cetera. Charitas autem qua nos Deum diligimus, dicitur in cordibus nostris diffusa, id est quia ad omnes mores et actus animae perficiendos se extendit; nam, ut dicitur I Cor. XIII, 4: charitas patiens est, benigna est, et cetera. Ex utroque autem intellectu horum verborum concluditur, quod spes non confundit. Si enim accipiatur charitas Dei qua nos diligit Deus, manifestum est quod his quos diligit seipsum non negabit. Deut. XXXIII, 3: dilexit populos, omnes sancti in manu illius sunt. Similiter etiam si charitas Dei accipiatur qua nos Deum diligimus, manifestum est, quod se diligentibus bona aeterna praeparavit. Io. XIV, 21: si quis diligit me, diligetur a patre meo, et cetera.
5:6
Postquam apostolus ostendit firmitatem spei per donum spiritus sancti, hic ostendit idem per mortem Christi. Et primo proponit quaestionem; secundo ostendit difficultatem, ibi vix enim pro iusto, etc.; tertio determinat quaestionis veritatem, ibi commendat autem suam charitatem, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: dictum est quod spes non confundit, quod quidem apparet hoc consideranti ut quid enim Christus cum adhuc infirmi essemus, scilicet infirmitate peccati. Ps. VI, 3: miserere mei, domine, quoniam infirmus sum. Nam sicut per corporalem infirmitatem dissolvitur humorum debita harmonia, ita etiam per peccatum debitus ordo affectionum excluditur. Cum ergo adhuc infirmi essemus, Christus mortuus est pro impiis. I Petr. c. III, 18: Christus semel pro peccatis nostris mortuus est, iustus pro iniustis. Et hoc secundum tempus, id est ut certo tempore in morte moraretur, die scilicet tertia surrecturus. Matth. XII, 40: sicut fuit Iona in ventre ceti tribus diebus et tribus noctibus, sic erit filius hominis in corde terrae. Hoc ergo magnum est, si consideremus quis mortuus sit. Magnum etiam est si consideremus pro quibus est mortuus. Non potest autem esse tam magnum quid, nisi fiat propter aliquem certum fructum, secundum illud Ps. XXIX, 10: quae utilitas in sanguine meo, dum descendo in corruptionem? Quasi dicat: nulla, si non sequatur humani generis salus.
5:7
Deinde cum dicit vix enim pro iusto, etc., ostendit praedictae quaestionis difficultatem ex parte eorum, pro quibus Christus mortuus est, scilicet pro impiis, dicens vix enim quis, id est, aliquis, moritur pro homine iusto liberando; quin immo, ut dicitur Is. LVII, 1: iustus perit et non est qui recogitet in corde suo, et cetera. Ideo dico vix moritur, nam forsitan quis, id est aliquis rarus ex zelo virtutis, audeat mori pro bono homine. Rarum enim est propter hoc quod est maximum, ut enim dicitur Io. XV, 13: maiorem hac dilectionem nemo habet, et cetera. Illud autem quod Christus fecit, ut quis moriatur pro impiis et iniustis, nunquam invenitur. Et ideo merito admirandum est, quare Christus hoc fecerit. Potest autem et aliter legi, ut pro iusto intelligamus aliquem in virtute exercitatum; per bonum autem, hominem innocentem. Et quamvis secundum hoc iustus sit praestantior bono, tamen pro iusto vix aliquis moritur. Cuius ratio est, quia innocens, qui per bonum intelligitur, magis miserandus videtur propter defectum aetatis vel alicuius huiusmodi. Iustus autem, quia perfectus est et absque defectu, non habet in se misericordiae malitiam. Quod ergo aliquis moriatur pro innocente, potest ex compassione misericordiae provenire; sed quod aliquis moriatur pro iusto, provenit ex zelo virtutis, qui in paucioribus invenitur quam misericordiae passio. Deinde cum dicit commendat autem, etc., respondet praemissae quaestioni. Et primo ponit responsionem; secundo ex hoc arguit ad propositum, ibi multo ergo magis, etc.; tertio ostendit necessitatem consequentiae, ibi si enim cum inimici, et cetera.
5:8
Dicit ergo primo: quaesitum est quare Christus pro impiis mortuus est; et ad hoc est responsio, quia per hoc Deus suam charitatem commendat in nobis, id est per hoc ostendit se nos maxime diligere, quoniam si cum adhuc peccatores essemus, Christus mortuus est pro nobis, et hoc secundum tempus, sicut supra expositum est. Ipsa autem mors Christi pro nobis charitatem ostendit Dei, quia dedit filium suum, ut pro nobis satisfaciens moreretur. Io. c. III, 16: sic Deus dilexit mundum, ut filium suum unigenitum daret, et cetera. Et ita sicut charitas Dei patris ad nos ostenditur per hoc quod spiritum suum dedit nobis, ut supra dictum est, ita et per hoc quod dedit filium suum, ut hic dicitur. Sed in hoc quod dicit commendat, immensitatem quamdam divinae charitatis assignat, quae quidem ostenditur, tum ex ipso facto, quia scilicet dedit filium suum, ut moreretur pro nobis, tum ex parte nostrae conditionis, quia hoc non fecit provocatus nostris meritis, cum adhuc peccatores essemus. Eph. II, 4 s.: Deus qui dives est in misericordia propter nimiam charitatem qua dilexit nos, cum essemus mortui peccatis, convivificavit nos Christo, et cetera.
5:9
Consequenter cum dixit multo ergo magis, etc., concludit propositum ex praemissis, dicens: si Christus pro nobis mortuus est, cum adhuc peccatores essemus, multo magis vivificati nunc in sanguine ipsius, sicut supra III, 25 habitum est, quem proposuit Deus propitiatorem per fidem, per sanguinem ipsius, salvi erimus ab ira, id est a vindicta damnationis aeternae, quam propter peccata homines incurrunt. Matth. III, 7: genimina viperarum, quis demonstravit, et cetera. Deinde cum dicit si enim cum inimici, etc., ostendit necessitatem praedictae consequentiae, quae procedit a minori ad maius affirmando. Et est ibi observanda duplex comparatio minoris ad maius: una quidem ex parte nostra, alia ex parte Christi. Ex parte quidem nostra comparat inimicos reconciliatis. Minus enim videtur quod aliquis bene faciat inimicis, quam iam reconciliatis. Ex parte Christi comparat mortem vitae. Potentior enim vita eius videtur quam mors, quia, ut dicitur II Cor. ult.: mortuus est ex infirmitate, scilicet carnis nostrae, sed vivit ex virtute Dei. Et ideo dicit: ratione conclusum est, quod multo magis vivificati salvi erimus per ipsum.
5:10
Si enim cum inimici essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo, et hoc per mortem filii eius: multo magis iam nos reconciliati, salvi erimus, et hoc in vita ipsius. Est autem considerandum, quod homo dicitur inimicus Deo dupliciter. Uno modo, quia contra Deum inimicitiam exercet, dum eius mandatis renititur. Iob XV, v. 26: cucurrit adversus Deum erecto collo. Alio modo per hoc quod Deus homines odio habet, non quidem secundum ipsum quod fecit, quia quantum ad hoc dicitur Sap. c. XI, 25: dilexisti omnia, et nihil odisti eorum quae fecisti, etc.; sed quantum ad hoc quod in homine inimicus homo, id est Diabolus, fecit, id est quantum ad peccatum. Sap. XIV, 9: similiter odio sunt Deo impius, et cetera. Et Eccli. XII, 7: altissimus odio habet peccatores. Subtracta inimicitiae causa, scilicet peccato, per Christum, sequitur reconciliatio per ipsum. II Cor. V, 19: Deus erat in ipso mundum reconcilians sibi. Peccatum autem nostrum sublatum est per mortem filii eius. Circa quod considerandum est quod mors Christi tripliciter considerari potest. Uno modo secundum ipsam rationem mortis. Et sic dicitur Sap. I, 13: Deus mortem non fecit in humana natura, sed est per peccatum inducta. Et ideo mors Christi, ex communi mortis ratione, non fuit sic Deo accepta, ut per ipsam reconciliaretur, quia Deus non laetatur in perditione vivorum, ut dicitur Sap. I, 13. Alio modo potest mors Christi considerari secundum quod est in actione occidentium, quae maxime Deo displicuit. Unde contra eos Petrus dicit Act. III, 14: vos sanctum et iustum negastis et petistis homicidam, et cetera. Unde mors Christi sic considerata, non potuit esse reconciliationis causa, sed magis indignationis. Tertio modo potest considerari secundum quod processit ex voluntate Christi patientis, quae quidem voluntas informata fuit ad mortem sustinendam, cum ex obedientia ad patrem, Phil. II, 8: factus est obediens patri usque ad mortem, tum etiam ex charitate ad homines, Eph. V, 2: dilexit nos et tradidit se pro nobis. Et ex hoc mors Christi fuit meritoria et satisfactoria pro peccatis nostris, et intantum Deo accepta, quod sufficit ad reconciliationem omnium hominum, etiam occidentium Christum, ex quibus aliqui sunt salvati ipso orante, quando dixit Lc. XXIII, v. 34: ignosce illis quia nesciunt quid faciunt. Deinde cum dicit non solum autem, etc., ostendit quae bona iam in re consequimur per gratiam, dicens non solum autem gloriamur, in spe gloriae quam in futuro expectamus, sed in Deo, id est in hoc quod sumus etiam nunc Deo coniuncti per fidem et charitatem, I Cor. I, 31, et II Cor. c. X, 17: qui gloriatur, in domino, et cetera.
5:11
Et hoc quidem per dominum nostrum Iesum Christum, per quem, etiam nunc in praesenti tempore, reconciliationem accepimus, ut de inimicis facti simus amici. Col. I, v. 20: per eum placuit reconciliari omnia, et cetera. Posset autem et continuari cum eo quod dictum est: salvi erimus in vita ipsius a peccato et a poena, et non solum salvi erimus a malis, sed etiam gloriamur in Deo, id est per hoc quod erimus idem in futuro cum ipso. Io. XVII, 22: ut sint unum in nobis, sicut et nos unum sumus.
Postquam apostolus ostendit quae bona per gratiam Christi consecuti sumus, hic consequenter ostendit a quibus malis per eam liberemur. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo enim ostendit quod per gratiam Christi liberati sumus a servitute peccati. Secundo ostendit quod per gratiam eius sumus liberati a servitute legis; cap. VII, ibi an ignoratis, fratres, et cetera. Tertio ostendit quod per gratiam Christi liberamur a damnatione; cap. VIII, ibi nihil nunc damnationis, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit quod per gratiam Christi liberamur ab originali peccato praeterito; secundo ostendit quod ea tuti, regimur contra peccata futura, ibi quid ergo dicemus, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo agit de processu peccati; secundo, de processu gratiae destruentis peccatum, ibi sed non sicut delictum, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo proponit processum peccati; secundo manifestat, ibi usque ad legem, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo proponit processum peccati; secundo ostendit eius universalitatem, ibi et ita in omnes, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit peccati originem; secundo, originem mortis, ibi et per peccatum mors, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo quod per Christum reconciliationem accepimus. Ita enim a Christo reconciliatio procedit in mundum, sicut per unum hominem, scilicet per Adam, peccatum intravit in hunc mundum. I Cor. XV, 22: sicut in Adam omnes moriuntur, ita et in Christo omnes vivificabuntur. Est autem hic considerandum quod haeretici Pelagiani peccatum originale in parvulis esse negantes, haec verba apostoli dicebant esse intelligenda de peccato actuali. Quod quidem secundum eos in hunc mundum intravit per Adam, in quantum omnes peccantes peccatum Adae imitantur, secundum illud Osee VI, 7: ipsi autem sicut Adam transgressi sunt pactum, et cetera. Sed, sicut dicit Augustinus contra eos, si de introitu peccati actualis, qui est per imitationem, hic apostolus loqueretur, non diceret peccatum per hominem in hunc mundum intrasse, sed magis per Diabolum quem peccantes imitantur; secundum illud Sap. II, v. 24: invidia Diaboli mors introivit, et cetera. Est ergo intelligendum quod per Adam peccatum in hunc mundum intravit, non solum imitatione sed etiam propagatione, id est per carnis originem vitiatam, secundum illud Eph. II, 3: eramus natura filii irae, et in Ps. l, 7: ecce enim in iniquitatibus conceptus sum, et cetera. Sed videtur hoc esse impossibile, quod per originem carnis peccatum ab uno in alium traducatur. Peccatum enim est in anima rationali, quae non traducitur per originem carnis, tum quia intellectus non est alicuius corporis actus, et ita non potest per virtutem corporalis seminis causari, ut philosophus dicit in libro de generatione animalium. Tum etiam quia cum anima rationalis sit quaedam res subsistens, ut puta per se operationem habens et corpore corrupto non corrumpatur, consequens est, quod non generetur, corpore generato, sicut aliae formae, quae non possunt per se subsistere, sed potius causatur a Deo. Consequens igitur videtur quod nec peccatum, quod est accidens animae, possit per carnis originem traduci. Ad hoc autem rationabiliter respondetur, quod licet in semine non sit anima, est tamen in semine virtus dispositiva corporis ad animae receptionem, quae cum corpori infunditur, etiam ei suo modo conformatur, eo quod omne receptum est in recipiente per modum recipientis. Et exinde videmus quod filii similantur parentibus, non solum in defectibus corporalibus, sicut leprosus generat leprosum et podagricus podagricum, sed etiam in defectibus animae, sicut iracundus iracundum et amentes ex amentibus nascuntur. Quamvis enim pes, qui est subiectum podagrae, non sit in semine, nec anima quae est subiectum irae vel amentiae, est tamen in semine virtus formativa corporalium membrorum et dispositiva ad animam. Sed adhuc remanet dubitatio, quia defectus, qui ex vitiata origine trahuntur, non habent rationem culpae. Non enim merentur poenam, sed magis misericordiam, sicut philosophus dicit de eo qui nascitur caecus, vel quocumque alio modo aliter orbatus. Et hoc ideo, quia de ratione culpae est quod sit voluntaria et in potestate hominis cui culpa imputatur. Sic igitur si aliquis defectus in nos pervenit per originem primi parentis, non videtur in nobis habere rationem culpae, sed poenae. Et ideo dicendum est, quod sicut peccatum actuale est peccatum personae, quia per voluntatem personae peccantis committitur, ita peccatum originale est peccatum naturae, quod per voluntatem principii humanae naturae commissum est. Est enim considerandum quod sicut diversa corporis membra partes sunt personae unius hominis, ita omnes homines sunt partes et quasi quaedam membra humanae naturae. Unde et Porphyrius dicit quod participatione speciei plures homines sunt unus homo. Videmus autem quod actus peccati exercitus per aliquod membrum, puta per manum vel pedem, non habet rationem culpae ex voluntate manus vel pedis, sed ex voluntate totius hominis, a qua sicut a quodam principio derivatur motus peccati ad singula membra. Et similiter a voluntate Adae, qui fuit principium humanae naturae, tota inordinatio naturae habet culpae rationem in omnibus, ad quos pervenit quantum ad hoc quod susceptivi sunt culpae. Et sicut peccatum actuale, quod est peccatum personae, trahitur ad singula membra per aliquem actum personalem, ita peccatum originale trahitur ad singulos homines per actum naturae, qui est generatio. Et ita sicut per generationem humana natura trahitur, ita etiam per generationem traducitur defectus humanae naturae, qui est consecutus ex peccato primi parentis. Est autem hic defectus carentia originalis iustitiae, quae erat primo homini divinitus collata, non solum ut erat persona quaedam singularis, sed etiam ut erat principium humanae naturae, ut scilicet eam simul cum natura in posteros traduceret. Et ideo simili modo amissionem huius originalis iustitiae per peccatum ad posteros transmittit, habentem in eis rationem culpae, ratione iam dicta. Et ideo dicitur quod in processu originalis peccati persona infecit naturam, scilicet Adam peccans vitiavit humanam naturam, sed postmodum in aliis natura vitiata inficit personam, dum scilicet genito imputatur ad culpam naturae vitium propter voluntatem primi parentis, ut dictum est. Ex hoc autem patet quod licet primum peccatum primi parentis per originem traducatur in posteros, alia tamen eius peccata, vel etiam aliorum hominum, in filios non traducuntur, quia per solum primum peccatum sublatum est bonum naturae, quod erat per originem naturae traducendum. Per alia vero peccata subtrahitur bonum gratiae personalis, quod non transit ad alios posteros. Et inde etiam est quod quamvis peccatum Adae deletum fuerit per suam poenitentiam, iuxta illud Sap. X, 2: eduxit illum a delicto suo, non tamen eius poenitentia delere potuit peccatum posterorum, quia eius poenitentia fuit per actum personalem, quia ultra eius personam non se extendebat. Et propter hoc est unum tantum originale peccatum, quia solus defectus consequens primum peccatum originaliter derivatur ad posteros.
5:12
Et ideo apostolus singulariter dicit per unum hominem peccatum in hunc mundum intravit, non autem dixit pluraliter peccata: quod fuisset dicendum si de actualibus loqueretur. Dicitur autem quandoque pluraliter peccata originalia, sicut in Ps. l, 7: in peccatis concepit me mater mea, quia continet virtualiter multa peccata, inquantum ex corruptione fomitis inclinamur ad multa peccata. Sed videtur quod peccatum originale non intraverit in hunc mundum per unum hominem, scilicet Adam, sed magis per unam mulierem, scilicet Evam, quae primo peccavit, secundum illud Eccli. XXV, 33: a muliere factum est initium peccati, et per illam omnes morimur. Ad hoc respondetur in Glossa dupliciter. Uno modo, quia consuetudo Scripturae est ut genealogiae non per mulieres, sed per viros texantur, sicut patet Matth. I, 1 ss. et Lc. c. III, 23 ss. Et ideo apostolus hic volens quasi genealogiam quamdam peccati ostendere, non fecit mentionem de muliere, sed solum de viro. Alio modo, quia etiam mulier de viro sumpta est, et ideo quod est mulieris attribuitur viro. Potest etiam alio modo dici, et melius, quod cum peccatum originale traducatur simul cum natura, sicut dictum est, sicut per virtutem activam viri, muliere materiam ministrante, natura traducitur, ita et peccatum originale. Unde si Adam non peccasset, Eva peccante, non per hoc fuisset peccatum traductum ad posteros. Illa enim est causa quare Christus peccatum originale non traxit, quia ex sola foemina sine virili semine carnem accepit. Per hoc verbum apostoli Augustinus respondet Iuliano haeretico in hunc modum quaerenti: non peccat iste qui nascitur, non peccat iste qui genuit, non peccat ille qui condidit: per quas igitur rimas, inter tot praesidia innocentiae peccatum fingis ingressum? Sed Augustinus respondet: quid quaeris latentem rimam, cum habeas apertissimam ianuam? Nam secundum apostolum per unum hominem peccatum in hunc mundum intravit. Consequenter tangit ingressum mortis in mundum, cum dicit et per peccatum mors, scilicet in hunc mundum intravit, secundum illud Sap. I: iniustitia mortis est acquisitio. Videtur autem quod mors non sit ex peccato, sed magis ex natura, utpote proveniens ex necessitate materiae. Est enim corpus humanum ex contrariis compositum. Unde est naturaliter corruptibile. Dicendum est autem quod natura humana dupliciter potest considerari. Uno modo secundum principia intrinseca, et sic mors est ei naturalis. Unde Seneca dicit in libro de remediis fortuitorum, quod mors natura est hominis, non poena. Alio modo potest considerari natura hominis secundum quod per divinam providentiam fuit ei per iustitiam originalem provisum. Quae quidem iustitia erat quaedam rectitudo, ut mens hominis esset sub Deo, et inferiores vires essent sub mente, et corpus sub anima, et omnia exteriora sub homine: ita scilicet, quod quamdiu mens hominis Deo subderetur, vires inferiores subderentur rationi, et corpus animae, indeficienter ab ea vitam recipiens, et exteriora homini, ut scilicet omnia servirent, et nullum ex eis nocumentum sentiret. Hoc autem providentia divina disposuit propter dignitatem animae rationalis, quae cum naturaliter sit incorruptibilis, debebatur sibi incorruptibile corpus. Sed quia corpus quod est ex contrariis compositum, oportebat esse organum sensus, et tale corpus secundum naturam suam incorruptibile esse non potest, supplevit potentia divina quod deerat naturae humanae, dans animae virtutem continendi corpus incorruptibiliter, sicut faber, si posset, daret ferro, ex quo cultellum fabricat, virtutem ut rubiginem nullam contraheret. Sic ergo postquam mens hominis per peccatum est a Deo aversa, amisit virtutem continendi inferiores vires, et etiam corpus et exteriora, et sic incurrit mortem naturalem a causis intrinsecis, et violentam ab exterioribus nocumentis. Deinde cum dicit et ita in omnes, etc., ostendit universalitatem huius processus et quantum ad mortem et quantum ad peccatum, ordine tamen retrogrado. Nam supra prius egit de ingressu peccati, qui est causa ingressus mortis, nunc autem prius agit de universalitate mortis, tamquam de manifestiori; et hoc est quod dicit: et ita mors, scilicet, vel peccatum primi parentis, pertransiit in omnes, quia scilicet per originem vitiatam contrahunt homines necessitatem moriendi. II Reg. XIV, 14: omnes morimur. Ps. LXXXVIII, 49: quis est homo qui vivit, et cetera. Deinde tangit universalitatem processus peccati, cum dicit in quo omnes peccaverunt, quod, sicut Augustinus dicit in Glossa, potest dupliciter intelligi. Uno modo in quo, scilicet primo homine, vel in quo, scilicet peccato: quia scilicet eo peccante quodammodo omnes peccaverunt, inquantum in eo erant sicut in prima sua origine. Sed cum Christus etiam originem ex Adam traxerit, ut patet Lc. III, 23 ss., videtur quod etiam ipse, eo peccante, peccaverit. Ad hoc respondet Augustinus super Genesim ad litteram, quod Christus non omnimodo fuit in Adam, quo nos fuimus: nos enim fuimus et secundum corpulentam substantiam, et secundum seminalem rationem. Christus autem fuit in eo solum secundum corpulentam substantiam. Quod quidam male intelligentes, putaverunt quod tota substantia corporum humanorum, quae pertinet ad veritatem humanae naturae, fuerit actu in Adam, et per quamdam multiplicationem divina virtute factam, id est, quod sumptum est ab Adam, est in tanta corporum quantitate ampliatum. Sed hoc est inconveniens opera naturae miraculo attribuere, praesertim quia videmus quod corpus humanum quantumcumque sit de veritate humanae naturae, corrumpitur et accipit aliam formam. Unde quia omne generabile est corruptibile, et e converso, oportet dicere quod materia quae ante generationem hominis sub alia forma quam humana fuit, formam humanae carnis assumpserit, et sic non totum quod est in corporibus nostris ad veritatem naturae pertinens fuit actu in eodem, sed solum secundum originem, prout scilicet effectus est in principio activo. Secundum hoc ergo intelligendum est quod cum in nostra generatione sit et materia corporalis quam foemina ministrat, et vis activa quae est in semine maris; utrumque per originem ducitur ab Adam, sicut a primo principio. Et ideo dicitur in eo fuisse et secundum rationem seminalem, et secundum corpulentam substantiam: quia scilicet utrumque ab eo processit. In generatione autem Christi fuit corpulenta substantia quam traxit de virgine: loco autem rationis seminalis fuit virtus activa spiritus sancti, quae non derivatur ab Adam, et ideo non fuit in Adam secundum seminalem rationem, sed tantum secundum substantiam corpulentam. Sic igitur nos accipimus peccatum ab Adam et trahimus: atque naturam humanam ab eo accipimus; sicut a principio activo, quod est esse in eo secundum seminalem rationem, quod quidem non competit Christo, ut dictum est. Videtur ulterius quod peccatum originale non transeat in omnes, quia baptizati a peccato originali purgantur per Baptismum: et ita videtur quod non possint in posteros peccatum transmittere quod non habent. Dicendum est autem quod per Baptismum homo liberatur a peccato originali quantum ad mentem, sed remanet peccati infectio quantum ad carnem; unde, infra VII, 25 dicit apostolus: ego ipse mente servio legi Dei, carne autem legi peccati. Homo autem non generat mente carnales filios, sed carne: et ideo non transmittit novitatem Christi, sed vetustatem Adae.
5:13
Postquam apostolus ostendit originem peccati et mortis, sive ingressum utriusque in mundum, hic manifestat quod dixerat. Et primo manifestat ipsum dictum; secundo manifestat similitudinem quam innuebat dicens, ibi propterea sicut, etc.; tertio exponit similitudinem, ibi qui est forma futuri, et cetera. Dixerat autem quod peccatum et mors in omnes transierunt, et hoc quidem, secundum expositionem Augustini, manifestare intendit per hoc quod etiam sub lege peccatum remansit, quasi lege illud excludere non valente. Circa quod duo facit. Primo manifestat propositum quantum ad peccatum; secundo, quantum ad mortem, ibi sed regnavit, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo ostendit peccatum fuisse etiam sub lege; secundo quid circa peccatum lex facit, ibi peccatum autem, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: dictum est quod omnes peccaverunt in Adam, quia nec etiam lex peccatum abstulit. Usque ad legem, id est etiam sub lege, ut ly usque teneatur inclusive, peccatum erat in mundo, quod quidem potest intelligi de lege naturae et de lege Moysi: similiter et de peccato actuali et de peccato originali. Peccatum enim originale erat in parvulo usque ad legem naturae, id est usque ad usum rationis per quem homo huiusmodi leges advertit. Ps. l, 6: in peccatis concepit me mater mea. Nec tamen cessat hoc peccatum lege naturali adveniente in homine, sed magis excrescit per additionem peccati actualis, quia, ut dicitur Eccle. VII, 21: non est homo iustus in terra qui faciat bonum, et cetera. Sed si intelligamus de lege Moysi, tunc quod dicitur peccatum fuisse in mundo usque ad legem, potest intelligi non solum de originali, sed etiam de actuali; quia et ante legem et sub lege peccatum utrumque permansit, Prov. XX, 9: quis potest dicere: mundum est cor meum? Quamvis autem lex peccatum non auferret, peccati tamen cognitionem fecit, quod antea non cognoscebatur. Unde subdit peccatum autem non imputabatur. Quod quidem planum est, si intelligatur de lege naturali. Quamvis enim peccatum originale sit in parvulo ante legem naturalem, et reputetur ei a Deo, non tamen imputatur ei apud homines. Si autem intelligatur de lege Moysi, planum est quantum ad aliqua peccata actualia, quod non imputabantur ante legem, sicut illa quae specialiter sunt per legem prohibita, quae homines peccata non reputabant, sicut quod dicitur Exod. XX, 17: non concupisces, et cetera. Imputabantur tamen quaedam peccata prout erant contra legem naturae. Unde et Gen. XXXIX, 11 s. Joseph legitur in carcerem missus propter adulterium sibi impositum. Consequenter agit de morte, dicens: quamvis peccata ante legem non imputarentur, tamen mors, scilicet spiritualiter, id est peccatum vel aeterna damnatio, de qua dicitur in Ps. XXXIII, 21: mors peccatorum pessima, regnavit, id est potestatem suam exercuit in homines, ducendo eos in damnationem, ab Adam, per quem peccatum intravit in mundum, usque ad Moysen, sub quo data est lex, Io. I, 17: lex per Moysen data est. Non solum in eos qui peccaverunt actualiter, sed etiam in eos qui non peccaverunt in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae, qui actualiter peccavit. Os. VI, 7: ipsi autem sicut Adam transgressi sunt pactum, ibi praevaricati sunt in me, quia etiam pueri damnationem incurrebant. Potest etiam et sub hoc sensu intelligi de morte corporali, per quam manifestatur peccatum fuisse etiam cum non imputabatur, quasi dicat peccatum autem non imputabatur, ante legem, sed ex hoc deprehenditur fuisse quia regnavit mors, scilicet corporalis, primo quidem aliquas passiones inducendo, puta famem, et sitim et aegritudinem, et tandem totaliter dissolvendo, etiam in eos, qui non peccaverunt in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae, id est in pueros, qui non peccaverunt actualiter: quoniam etiam isti mortem corporalem antea et postea patiuntur, secundum illud Ps. LXXXVIII, 47: quis est homo qui, et cetera. Ambrosius autem aliter ista verba exposuit, scilicet de peccato actuali tantum et de lege Moysi. Et secundum eum inducuntur haec verba ad manifestandum, quod per primum parentem peccatum in hunc mundum intravit et in omnes transivit. Usque enim ad legem, id est, ante legem Moysi, peccatum erat in mundo, scilicet peccatum actuale. Homines enim multipliciter peccabant contra legem naturae. Unde dicitur Gen. XIII, 13: homines Sodomitae pessimi erant. Peccatum autem non imputabatur cum lex non esset, quod est intelligendum, non quin imputaretur quasi puniendum apud homines, cum quidam legantur ante legem puniti ab hominibus pro peccatis, ut patet Gen. XXXIX et XL, sed non imputabatur quasi a Deo puniendum. Tunc enim non credebant homines quod Deus humana facta vel puniret vel praemiaret, secundum illud Iob c. XXII, 14: circa cardines caeli perambulat, nec nostra considerat. Sed postea lege divinitus data innotuit quod peccata imputantur a Deo ad poenam, et non solum ab hominibus. Et ideo quia homines non credebant se puniendos a Deo pro peccatis, libere et absque fraeno peccabant ubi humanum iudicium non timebant. Et ideo subdit: sed mors, id est peccatum, regnavit, id est, omnimodam suam potestatem exercuit, ab Adam usque ad Moysen, exclusive. Nam per Moysen data est lex, quae incepit regnum peccati diminuere, incutiens timorem divini iudicii, secundum illud Deut. V, 29: quis det eos talem habere mentem, ut timeant me, et custodiant universa mandata mea? Regnavit, inquam, peccatum usque ad Moysen, non tamen in omnes, sed in eos qui peccaverunt in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae. Dicit enim Ambrosius in libris antiquis non inveniri hanc negationem non, unde credit a corruptoribus appositam. Adam quippe magis credidit promissioni Diaboli quam comminationi divinae, ut patet Gen. III, et ita quodammodo Diabolum praetulit Deo. Sic igitur in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae praevaricantur idololatrae, qui, relicto Dei cultu, Diabolum colunt. In tales ergo mors, id est peccatum, totaliter regnavit, quia eos omnino possedit. Fuerunt autem ante legem Moysi veri Dei cultores, qui et si peccarent, non tamen peccatum in eis regnabat, quia non totaliter eos a Deo separabat: sed peccabant sub Deo, id est, sub fide unius Dei, etiam si peccarent mortaliter: vel sub charitate Dei, cum peccabant venialiter. Ex utraque harum expositionum potest conflari tertia, quae magis videtur ad intentionem apostoli pertinere. Dixerat enim quod per unum hominem peccatum in hunc mundum intravit, et quia peccatum est transgressio legis divinae, posset alicui videri, quod hoc non esset verum quantum ad tempus ante legem, praesertim cum supra IV, 15 dixerit: ubi non est lex, nec praevaricatio. Et ideo posset aliquis credere, quod non per unum hominem peccatum in mundum intravit, sed magis per legem. Et ideo ad hoc excludendum dicit, quod usque ad legem, id est, tempus ante legem, peccatum erat in mundo, et originale et actuale, non tamen erat peccatum cognitum; praesertim quasi a Deo puniendum. Et hoc est quod subdit peccatum autem non imputabatur, scilicet quasi contra Deum existens, cum lex, scilicet divinitus data, non esset. Fuerunt enim aliqui, ut dicit philosophus in V Ethicorum, qui crediderunt quod nihil est iustum naturaliter, et per consequens nec iniustum, sed per solam positionem legis humanae. Et secundum hoc non imputabatur aliquod peccatum, quasi contra Deum existens, et praecipue peccatum originale, id est non cognoscebatur. Sed quod ista reputatio hominum esset falsa, ostenditur per effectum, quia mors corporalis regnavit ab Adam, per quem intravit originale peccatum in mundum usque ad Moysen, sub quo data fuit lex; et ita cum mors sit effectus peccati praecipue originalis, manifestum est quod ante legem fuit peccatum originale in mundo.
5:14
Et ne aliquis dicat quod moriebantur propter peccata actualia, ad hoc excludendum dicit quod regnavit etiam in eos qui non peccaverunt proprio actu, scilicet pueros, et etiam in iustos qui non peccaverunt mortaliter, qui tamen peccaverunt in primo homine, ut supra dictum est. Et ideo subdit in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae, inquantum similitudinem illius peccati traxerunt per originem simul cum similitudine naturae; quasi dicat, quod moriebantur absque proprio peccato, demonstrat quod in eis erat diffusa similitudo peccati Adae per originem. Et hoc est quod apostolus manifestare intendit, scilicet, quod per Adam peccatum originale in mundum intravit. Deinde, cum dicit qui est forma futuri, etc., exponit similitudinem, quae intelligebatur in adverbio sicut. Unde dicit qui, scilicet Adam, est forma, id est, figura quaedam, futuri, id est Christi, tamen per contrarium. Nam sicut per Adam peccatum et mors in mundum intravit, ita per Christum intravit iustitia et vita. I Cor. XV, 47: primus homo de terra terrenus: secundus de caelo caelestis. Sunt autem et aliae similitudines inter Christum et Adam, quod scilicet sicut corpus Adae formatum fuit sine coitu, ita et corpus Christi de virgine. Et sicut de latere Adae dormientis sumpta est mulier, ita ex latere Christi dormientis in cruce fluxit sanguis et aqua, ut dicitur Io. XIX, 34, quae significant sacramenta quibus est formata Ecclesia.
Postquam apostolus posuit ingressum peccati in hunc mundum, hic agit de progressu gratiae abolentis peccatum. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo ostendit quomodo per Christi gratiam remotum est peccatum, quod per unum hominem in mundum intravit; secundo ostendit quomodo per gratiam Christi peccatum est remotum, quod lege adveniente superabundaverat, ibi lex autem subintravit, et cetera. Ostendit autem quod per gratiam Christi removetur peccatum per Adam introductum in mundum, comparando gratiam Christi peccato Adae, quia scilicet plus potest gratia Christi in bono, quam peccatum Adae in malo. Et circa hoc duo facit. Primo comparat ipsas causas, scilicet gratiam Christi peccato Adae: secundo ponit comparationem earum quantum ad effectus, ibi et non sicut per unum, et cetera. Circa primum duo facit. Primo proponit comparationem; secundo, manifestat eam, ibi si enim unius, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: dictum est quod Adam est forma futuri, sed non sicut delictum, etc., quasi dicat: non est aestimandum quod tantae efficaciae sit delictum Adae, quantae est efficaciae donum Christi. Cuius ratio est ista: quia peccatum procedit ex infirmitate voluntatis humanae, gratia autem procedit ex immensitate bonitatis divinae, quam manifestum est voluntati humanae, praesertim infirmae, praeferri. Et ideo virtus gratiae excedit omne peccatum. Et idcirco dicebat David: miserere mei, Deus, secundum magnam misericordiam tuam. Et propter hoc iuste reprobatur verbum Cain, Gen. IV, 13: dicentis: maior est iniquitas mea, quam ut veniam merear. Deinde cum dicit si enim unius, etc., manifestat quod dixerat, scilicet quod donum gratiae excedit delictum Adae, dicens si enim delicto unius, scilicet Adae, multi mortui sunt, id est, si ex delicto Adae peccatum et mors transivit in multos alios, quia in omnes qui in eo peccaverunt, multo magis gratia Dei et donum, id est, gratuitum Dei donum, ut ly et expositive teneatur. Vel gratia Dei refertur ad remissionem peccati. Supra eodem: iustificati gratis per gratiam ipsius, et cetera. Donum autem refertur ad bona superaddita ultra remissionem peccatorum, ut dicit Ps. LXVII, 19, secundum aliam litteram, dedit dominus dona hominibus. Multo magis, inquam, huiusmodi gratia et dona, abundavit in plures, idest in multos. Quanto enim aliquid est potentius, tanto magis se potest ad multa extendere. Peccatum autem Adae ad multos se extendit, quod probatur per mortem.
5:15
Unde signanter dicit quod unius delicto multi mortui sunt. Mors enim argumentum est peccati originalis, ut supra dictum est. Adae dixit Deus: quacumque die comederis, et cetera. Gratia Dei quae est fortior, multo amplius ad multos extenditur. Hebr. II, 10: qui multos filios in gloriam adduxit. Notandum est autem quod dicit abundavit, quia non solum gratia Dei processit in multos ad deletionem peccati per Adam inducti, sed etiam ad peccata actualia delenda, et multa alia bona consequenda. II Cor. IX, 8: potens est autem Deus omnem gratiam abundare facere in vobis. Sicut enim peccatum ex uno homine abundavit in multos ex prima suggestione Diaboli, ita et gratia Dei per unum hominem processit ad multos. Unde signanter addit in gratia, id est, per gratiam unius hominis Iesu Christi. Sic enim a Deo gratia in multos effunditur, ut eam per Christum accipiant, in quo omnis plenitudo gratiarum invenitur, secundum illud Io. I, 16: de plenitudine eius omnes accepimus, gratiam pro gratia. Sic autem legenda est littera secundum expositionem Augustini, ut hoc quod dicitur plures, non accipiatur comparative, sed absolute: et ita vult quod attendatur comparatio quantum ad hoc, quod si delictum unius Adae processit in multos, multo magis gratia unius Christi in multos. Sed secundum Ambrosium ly plures accipitur comparative, ut sit sensus, quod delicto, id est peccato actuali, unius, scilicet Adae, multi, non omnes, mortui sunt, scilicet morte peccati, imitando scilicet peccatum ipsius Adae per idololatriam, ut supra expositum est. Sap. XIII, 10 dicitur de idololatris: infelices autem sunt, et inter mortuos spes eorum. Et multo magis gratia Dei abundavit in plures, scilicet quam in idololatris qui peccaverunt in similitudinem Adae, quia non solum eorum peccata tolluntur per gratiam Christi, sed etiam peccata eorum qui in fide unius Dei permanserunt. Mich. ult.: deponet iniquitates nostras, et proiiciet omnia peccata nostra. Deinde, cum dicit et non sicut, etc., comparat Christi gratiam peccato Adae, quantum ad effectum, quia non solum utrumque in multos redundat, sed etiam maiorem effectum habet gratia Christi quam peccatum Adae. Et circa hoc tria facit. Primo proponit quod intendit; secundo manifestat propositum, ibi nam iudicium etc.; tertio probat, ibi si enim unius, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: non solum dictum est, scilicet quod Christi gratia magis abundat in multos, quam peccatum Adae, sed etiam in eis maiorem effectum facit.
5:16
Et hoc est quod dicit et non sicut per unum peccatum, ita et donum, quasi dicat: non tantus effectus sequitur per unum peccatum Adae in multis, quantus consequitur in multis per donum gratiae Christi. Potentioris enim causae potentior est effectus. Unde cum dictum sit gratiam esse potentiorem quam peccatum Adae, consequens est quod maiorem effectum efficiat. Deinde cum dicit nam iudicium, etc., manifestat quod dixerat, dicens: nam iudicium, id est divina punitio, procedit quidem ex uno, scilicet peccato primi parentis, in condemnationem, scilicet omnium hominum, quia in illo peccante peccaverunt, secundum illud quod supra dictum est, quod mors in omnes pertransiit, in quo omnes peccaverunt. Gratia autem Dei, quae datur per Christum, procedit ex multis delictis, id est, non solum ex illo uno originali sed etiam ex multis actualibus, in iustificationem, id est, perfectam emundationem. I Cor. c. VI, 11: et haec quidem fuistis aliquando, sed abluti estis, sed sanctificati estis, sed iustificati estis. Deinde, cum dicit si enim unius, etc., probat quod dixerat, scilicet quod gratia Christi procedit ex multis delictis in iustificationem. Et primo quidem hoc probat ex posteriori; secundo ex priori, ibi: sicut enim et cetera. Circa primum considerandum est quod apostolus in praemissa comparatione non ponit sibi respondentia, scilicet res eiusdem generis. Nam ex parte peccati ponit condemnationem, quae pertinet ad poenam, ex parte autem gratiae ponit iustificationem, quae non pertinet ad praemium, sed magis ad statum meriti. Sic igitur apostolus intendit, per hoc quod dicit quod peccatum inducit condemnationem, ostendere quod gratia inducat iustificationem. Et utitur tali ratione: sicut condemnatio mortis procedit ex peccato primi parentis, ita regnum vitae procedit ex gratia Christi. Haec enim duo uniformiter sibi correspondent, sed ad regnum vitae nullus potest pervenire, nisi per iustitiam, ergo per gratiam Christi homines iustificantur. Primo ergo ponit praemissas; secundo infert conclusionem intentam, ibi igitur sicut per unius, et cetera. Primam autem propositionem proponit dicens si enim ex delicto unius hominis mors regnavit per unum hominem, quia, sicut supra eodem dictum est, per unum hominem peccatum intravit et per peccatum mors, multo magis, homines, regnabunt in vita, scilicet aeterna, per unum Iesum Christum, qui dicit Io. X, 10: ego veni ut vitam habeant, et abundantius habeant, participando scilicet aeternitatem vitae, quae quidem abundantia hic per regnum designatur. Unde dicitur Apoc. XX, 4, quod regnabunt cum Christo annis mille, id est, aeterno tempore.
5:17
Minorem autem designat, interponendo abundantiam gratiae Christi et donationis, et iustitiae accipientes, quasi diceret: ad regnum vitae homines pervenire non possunt, nisi hoc accipiendo. Ita quod gratia Christi referatur ad dimissionem peccati, quam nulla merita praecedere possunt, et ideo omnino gratiae deputatur; si enim ex operibus, iam non ex gratia, ut dicitur infra XI, 6. Quod autem dicitur donationis, referendum est ad dona gratiarum, quibus homines promoventur in bona. Esther II, 18: largitus est dona iuxta magnificentiam principalem, et cetera. Quod autem dicitur iustitiae, referendum est ad rectitudinem operum. I Cor. I, 30: qui factus est nobis a Deo iustitia.
5:18
Deinde cum dicit igitur sicut, etc., infert conclusionem intentam, quae idem continet cum eo quod supra praemissum est, videlicet quod sicut per unius delictum Adae divinum iudicium processit in omnes homines qui carnaliter ex eo nascuntur in condemnationem mortis, sic et per unius scilicet iustitiam Christi, divina gratia processit in omnes homines, in iustificationem vitae, id est, quae ducit ad vitam. Sed videtur hoc esse falsum. Non enim omnes homines iustificantur per Christum, sicut omnes homines moriuntur per Adam. Sed dicendum quod intelligendum est quod, sicut omnes homines qui nascuntur carnaliter ex Adam, incurrunt condemnationem per eius peccatum, ita omnes qui renascuntur spiritualiter per Christum, adipiscuntur iustificationem vitae, quia, ut dicitur Io. III, 5, nisi quis renatus fuerit denuo ex aqua et spiritu sancto, non potest introire in regnum Dei, et cetera. Quamvis possit dici quod iustificatio Christi transit in iustificationem omnium hominum, quantum ad sufficientiam, licet quantum ad efficientiam procedat in solos fideles. Unde dicitur I Tim. IV, 10: qui est salvator omnium hominum, maxime autem fidelium. Ex hoc autem quod hic dicitur, accipere debemus, quod sicut nullus moritur, nisi per peccatum Adae, ita nullus iustificatur, nisi per iustitiam Christi, quae quidem est per fidem ipsius, secundum illud quod supra III, 22 dictum est: iustitia Dei per fidem Iesu Christi in omnes, qui credunt in eum. In eum autem crediderunt homines, non solum qui sunt post eius incarnationem, sed etiam qui eius incarnationem praecesserunt. Sicut enim nos credimus eum natum et passum, ita ipsi crediderunt nasciturum et passurum. Unde eadem est fides nostra et eorum. II Cor. IV, 13: habentes eumdem fidei spiritum, et cetera. Sic igitur probatum est quod gratia Christi procedat ad multorum iustificationem ex posteriori, scilicet ex regno vitae. Consequenter cum dicit sicut enim, etc., probat idem ex priori. Causae enim similes sunt suis effectibus. Inobedientia autem primi parentis, quae habet rationem iniustitiae, constituit peccatores et iniustos. Igitur obedientia Christi quae habet rationem iustitiae, constituit iustos. Et hoc est quod supra dictum est, quod gratia procedit in omnes homines in iustificationem.
5:19
Sed videtur esse dubium quod dicitur, quod per inobedientiam unius hominis peccatores constituti sunt multi, id est omnes qui ab eo nascuntur secundum rationem seminalem. Primum enim eius peccatum videtur fuisse superbia, magis quam inobedientia, secundum illud Eccli. X, 15: initium omnis peccati superbia. Sed dicendum est quod, sicut ibidem dicitur initium superbiae facit homines apostatare a Deo, quia scilicet prima pars superbiae consistit in hoc quod homo non vult subiici praeceptis divinis, quod ad inobedientiam pertinet. Unde primum hominis peccatum fuisse videtur inobedientia, non secundum actum exteriorem, sed secundum interiorem motum superbiae, quo voluit divino praecepto contraire. Unde eius inobedientiam dominus arguit Gen. III, 17: quia audisti vocem uxoris tuae, et comedisti de ligno de quo praeceperam tibi ne comederes, et cetera. Obedientia autem Christi hic dicitur secundum quam, praecepto patris obediens, mortem sustinuit pro salute nostra, secundum illud Phil. II, 8: factus est obediens usque ad mortem, et cetera. Nec est contrarium quod alibi dicitur, Christus ex charitate mortuus est, ut patet Eph. V, 2; quia hoc ipsum quod obedivit, processit ex dilectione quam habuit ad patrem et ad nos. Et est attendendum quod per obedientiam et inobedientiam probat nos per unum peccatores effici, et per unum iustificari: quia iustitia legalis, quae est omnis virtus, attenditur in observatione praeceptorum legis, quod pertinet ad rationem obedientiae. Iniustitia autem legalis, quae est omnis malitia ut dicitur V Ethicorum, attenditur in transgressione mandatorum legis, quae pertinet ad rationem inobedientiae. Sic ergo convenienter dicitur quod per obedientiam constituuntur homines iusti, et per inobedientiam peccatores.
Postquam apostolus ostendit quod per donum gratiae subtrahitur peccatum, quod per Adam in hunc mundum intraverat, hic ostendit quod per gratiam Christi tollitur peccatum, quod lege superveniente abundaverat. Circa hoc duo facit. Primo ponit abundantiam peccati, quae fuit per legem; secundo, absolutionem peccati, quae est per gratiam Christi, ibi ubi abundavit, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: dictum est quod per obedientiam unius hominis iusti constituuntur multi, non autem lex hoc facere potuit, sed potius lex subintravit, ut superabundaret delictum. Circa quod apostoli dictum, duplex occurrit dubitatio. Primo quidem de hoc quod dicit legem subintrasse, id est latenter intrasse post culpam originalem et actualem, vel post naturalem legem, ut Glossa dicit. Non enim lex occulte intravit sed manifeste data fuit, secundum illud Io. XVIII, 20: non in abscondito locutus sum. Dicendum est ergo quod licet ipsa legislatio fuerit data in manifesto, tamen mysteria legis erant in occulto, et praecipue quoad intentionem Dei circa legem ferendam, quae peccatum ostenderet, non sanaret, secundum illud infra XI, 34: quis cognovit sensum domini, et cetera. Potest etiam dici quod lex subintravit, id est quasi media intravit, inter peccatum hominis et donum gratiae Christi, quorum utrumque supra dixerat per unum ad plures transisse.
5:20
Secunda autem dubitatio est de hoc quod dicit legem subintrasse ut abundaret delictum. Sic enim videtur quod abundantia delicti sit finis legis, et ita sequitur quod lex sit mala, quia cuius finis malus est, ipsum quoque malum est; et hoc est contra illud I Tim. c. I, 8: scimus quidem quod lex bona est, et cetera. Ad hoc autem respondetur in Glossa tripliciter. Primo quidem ut dicamus quod ly ut, non ponitur causaliter, sed consecutive. Non enim ad hoc fuit data lex ut peccatum abundaret, quin potius lex, quantum in se fuit, peccatum prohibuit, secundum illud Ps. CXVIII, 11; in corde meo abscondi eloquia tua, ut non peccem tibi. Sed, lege data, consecuta est abundantia delictorum dupliciter. Uno quidem modo, quantum ad peccatorum multitudinem. Lex enim licet peccatum demonstraret, peccati tamen concupiscentiam non auferebat. Cum autem alicui prohibetur id quod concupiscit, vehementius in concupiscentiam illius exardescit, et sicut fluvius apposito obice fortius fluit et obicem frangit. Cuius ratio potest esse triplex. Una quidem, quia illud quod subiacet hominis potestati, non reputat aliquis pro magno, sed illud quod est extra hominis potestatem, apprehenditur ab homine quasi magnum. Prohibitio autem eius quod concupiscitur ponit illud quod prohibetur quasi extra hominis potestatem, et ideo concupiscentia magis exardescit in rem concupitam dum prohibetur. Secunda ratio est quia interiores affectiones quando interius retinentur, ita quod exterius non deriventur, ex hoc ipso magis interius incenduntur; sicut patet in dolore et ira, quae dum interius clausa tenentur, magis augentur; si autem exterius quoquo modo procedant eorum virtus diminuitur. Prohibitio autem propter timorem poenae cogit hominem ut concupiscentiam suam ad exteriora non perducat et ideo ipsa concupiscentia, interius retenta, magis inflammatur. Tertia ratio est, quia illud quod non est nobis prohibitum, apprehendimus quasi possibile fieri quandocumque nobis placuerit: et ideo multoties, opportunitate existente, illud vitamus; sed quando aliquid est prohibitum, apprehenditur a nobis, ut non semper a nobis haberi possit: et ideo quando opportunitas datur sine timore poenae illud consequendi, promptiores ad hoc sumus. Et inde est quod, data lege, quae concupiscentiae usum prohibebat, et tamen ipsam concupiscentiam non mitigabat, concupiscentia ipsa magis ferventer homines ad peccata ducebat. Unde dicitur Ez. V, 5 s.: ista est Ierusalem, in medio gentium posui eam, et in circuitu eius terras, et contempsit iudicia mea, ut plus esset impia, quam gentes. Sed secundum hoc videtur quod omnis lex humana, quae gratiam non confert diminuentem concupiscentiam, faciat abundare peccata: quod est contra intentiones legislatorum, quia ad hoc tendunt, ut cives faciant bonos, ut patet per philosophum, II Ethicorum. Sed dicendum, quod alia est intentio legis humanae, et alia legis divinae. Lex enim humana refertur ad humanum iudicium, quod est de exterioribus actibus; sed lex divina refertur ad divinum iudicium, quod est de interioribus motibus cordis, secundum illud I Reg. XVI, 7: homo videt ea quae patent, sed Deus intuetur cor. Sic igitur lex humana suam intentionem consequitur, dum per prohibitionem et poenae comminationem impedit ne multiplicentur exteriores actus peccati, licet concupiscentia interior magis augeatur: sed quantum ad legem divinam etiam interiores concupiscentiae malae imputantur ad peccatum, quae abundant lege prohibente, et non auferente concupiscentiam. Sciendum tamen, quod, sicut philosophus dicit in X Ethic., prohibitio legis, licet illos qui sunt male dispositi cohibeat ab exterioribus peccatis solo poenae timore; quosdam tamen bene dispositos inducit per amorem virtutis. Sed ista bona dispositio quantum ad aliquid potest esse a natura, sed eius perfectio non est nisi per gratiam; ex qua contingit, quod etiam lege veteri data, non in omnibus peccatum abundat, sed in pluribus. Quidam vero, lege prohibente et gratia ulterius adiuvante, ad perfectionem virtutum tandem pervenerunt, secundum illud Eccli. XLIV, 1: laudemus viros gloriosos, etc., et infra: homines magnos virtute. Secundo superabundavit delictum lege superveniente quantum ad gravitatem reatus. Gravius enim fuit peccatum ubi accessit praevaricatio, non tantum legis naturae, sed etiam legis scriptae. Unde supra IV, 15 dictum est quod ubi non est lex, nec praevaricatio. Secundo, autem potest responderi ut dicitur, quod ly ut teneatur causaliter, ita tamen quod loquatur apostolus de abundantia delicti secundum quod est in nostra cognitione, ut sit sensus: lex subintravit ut abundaret delictum, id est ut abundantius delictum cognosceretur, secundum modum loquendi quo dicitur aliquid fieri cum innotescit. Unde supra dictum est, quod per legem est cognitio peccati. Tertio modo potest exponi ita quod ly ut teneatur causaliter, ita tamen quod abundantia delicti non intelligatur finis legis subintrantis, sed id quod ex abundantia delicti sequitur, scilicet humiliatio hominis. Lege enim subintrante abundavit delictum, ut dictum est in prima expositione. Ex qua quidem delicti abundantia consecutum est, quod homo infirmitatem suam recognoscens humilietur. Dicebat enim homo superbus, de viribus suis praesumens: non deest qui impleat, sed deest qui iubeat, secundum illud Ex. XXIV, 7: omnia quae locutus est dominus, facimus, et ei obediemus. Sed quando, lege data, consecuta est multitudo delictorum, homo suam infirmitatem cognovit ad observantiam legis, secundum illud Sap. IX, 5: infirmus homo et exigui temporis, et cetera. Intentio ergo Dei legem dantis non terminatur ad abundantiam peccatorum, sed ad humilitatem hominis, propter quam permisit abundare delicta. Sic ergo quia hoc erat occultum, signanter quantum ad hoc dicit quod lex subintravit. Quia vero hic agitur de lege et fine legis, duo consideranda occurrunt. Primo quidem quot modis lex dicatur; secundo, quis sit finis legis. Circa primum sciendum est, quod lex, uno modo, dicitur tota Scriptura veteris testamenti, secundum illud Io. XV, 25: ut impleatur sermo eorum, qui in lege eorum scriptus est, quia odio habuerunt me gratis, cum tamen hoc scriptum sit in Psalmo. Quandoque vero dicitur lex Scriptura quinque librorum Moysis, secundum illud Deut. XXXIII, 4: legem praecepit nobis Moyses. Tertio dicitur Decalogus praeceptorum, secundum illud Exodi XXIV, 12: dabo tibi duas tabulas lapideas, et legem ac mandata quae scripsi ut doceas. Quarto dicitur lex tota continentia caeremonialium, secundum illud Hebr. X, 1: umbram habens lex futurorum bonorum. Quinto dicitur lex aliquod speciale praeceptum caeremoniale, secundum illud Lev. VII, 11: haec est lex hostiae pacificorum. Sumitur autem hic lex communiter ab apostolo, quantum ad totam doctrinam legis Moysi, id est, quantum ad moralia et caeremonialia praecepta, quia scilicet per caeremonias legis non dabatur gratia, per quam homo adiuvaretur ad implenda praecepta moralia concupiscentia diminuta. Circa finem autem legis sciendum est quod in populo Iudaeorum tria fuerunt hominum genera, sicut et in quolibet alio populo, scilicet duri, id est peccatores et rebelles, proficientes et perfecti. Quantum igitur ad duros, lex fuit data in flagellum, et quantum ad praecepta moralia, ad quorum observantiam cogebantur per poenae comminationem, ut patet Lev. II, et quantum ad caeremonialia, quae ideo sunt multiplicata, ne liceret eis diis alienis alium cultum superaddere. Ex. XX, 34: in manu valida et brachio extento, et in furore effuso regnabo super vos. Sed proficientibus, qui dicuntur mediocres, lex fuit in paedagogum, secundum illud Gal. c. III, 24: lex paedagogus noster fuit in Christo. Et hoc quantum ad caeremonialia, quibus continebantur in divino cultu: et quantum ad moralia, quibus ad iustitiam promovebantur. Perfectis autem fuit quantum ad caeremonialia quidem in signum, secundum illud Ezech. XX, 12: sabbata mea dedi eis, ut essent signum inter me, et cetera. Quantum ad moralia vero in solatium, secundum illud infra c. VII, 22: condelector legi Dei secundum interiorem hominem. Deinde cum dicit ubi abundavit, etc., ostendit quomodo per gratiam tollitur abundantia delictorum. Et primo ponit gratiae abundantiam; secundo ostendit abundantis gratiae effectum, ibi ut sicut regnavit, et cetera. Dicit ergo primo: dictum est quod lege subintrante abundavit delictum: nec tamen propter hoc impeditur divinum propositum de salute Iudaeorum et totius humani generis, quia ubi abundavit delictum, scilicet in humano genere et specialiter in Iudaeis, superabundavit et gratia, scilicet Christi condonantis peccata. II Cor. IX, 8: potens est Deus omnem gratiam abundare facere in vobis. Eius autem quod hic dicitur, duplex ratio assignari potest. Una quidem ex effectu gratiae. Sicut enim magnitudinem morbi non sanat nisi fortis et efficax medicina, ita requirebatur abundans gratia ad hoc ut sanaret abundantiam delictorum. Lc. VII, 47: dimissa sunt ei peccata multa, quoniam dilexit multum, et cetera. Alia ratio sumi potest ex dispositione peccantis, qui, dum magnitudinem peccatorum suorum recognoscit, quandoque quidem desperat et contemnit, secundum illud Prov. c. XVIII, 3: impius cum in profundum venerit peccatorum, contemnit, etc., quandoque vero per auxilium divinum ex consideratione suorum peccatorum magis humiliatur, et maiorem consequitur gratiam, secundum illud Ps. XV, 4: multiplicatae sunt infirmitates eorum, postea acceleraverunt.
5:21
Deinde cum dicit ut, sicut regnavit peccatum in mortem, etc. ostendit effectum gratiae abundantis, qui quidem est per oppositum respondens effectui peccati. Ut, scilicet sicut peccatum, introductum per primum hominem, et abundans per legem, regnavit, id est plenum dominium in homines obtinuit, et hoc quousque duceret eos in mortem temporalem et aeternam, infra VI, 23: stipendia peccati mors ita et gratia Dei regnet, id est plene dominetur in nobis, per iustitiam, quam scilicet in nobis facit; supra eodem: iustificati gratis per gratiam ipsius. Et hoc quousque nos ducat in vitam aeternam, secundum illud infra c. VI, 23: gratia Dei vita aeterna. Et hoc totum est per Iesum Christum dominum nostrum, qui est dator gratiae, secundum illud Io. I, 17: gratia et veritas per Iesum Christum facta est, et etiam iustitia, I Cor. I, 30: qui factus est nobis iustitia a Deo, et dator vitae aeternae, Io. X, 28: ego vitam aeternam do eis.
5:1
Justificati ergo ex fide pacem haheastolus ex fide, non ex lege, esse justimus ad Deum per Dominum nostrum tiam, transit nunc ad declaranda bona Jesum Christum. Ad Deum, id est, erga quaedam, seu fructus, ornamenta et de- Deum, cum Deo. Postquam ostendit Apocora, quae gratiam justificationis consequuntur, nonnulli excellentias appellant. Ea bona sunt pax hominis cum Deo; adoptio filiorumDei; in tribulationibus non frangi animo, sed exultare; atque de his omnibus gloriari, non in se ipso, nec in alio, sed in Deo. Quae bona Cajetanus diligenter enumeravit ac distinxit. Pro verbo habeamus in plerisque Graecis codicibus est sxojisv habemus. Et ita Tertullianumlegisse, arguunthaec ejus verba lib. 5. adversus Marcionem cap. 13.: Monet (Paulus), justificatos ex fide Christi, non ex lege, pacem habere. Quod et a viro doctissimo Jacobo Pamelio in suis ad eum locum scholiis observatum est. Nec obscure pro ea lectione facit commentarius Ambrosio adscriptus. Addo, me quoque in quodam manuscripto Latino legisse habemus. At vero commentarii Graecorum Origenis, Chrysostomi, ac caeterorum pro nostra vulsrata faciunt lectione, tametsi perpauci sunt hodie Graeci codices, quibus legatur E)ja)|x£v. Nullus certe a R. Stephano adnotatus est. Utraque lectio bonum recipit sensum; nostra quidem hujusmodi: Cum jam simus ex fide justificati, ne peccemus amplius; sed pacem conservemus cum Deo, permanentes in justitia semel accepta. Vel secundum alios: pacem habeamus, id est, simus tranquillo et pacato animo, et a terroribus, quibus concuti solet mala conscientia, libero, utpote jam Deo reconciliati. Juxta alteram lectionem hic sensus est: Ex fide jam justificati, illud beneficii imprimis consecuti sumus, quod cum Deo pacem habemus, id est, quod Deo sumus reconciliati, quodque eum nunc habemus placatum, quem propter peccata nostra habebamus ofi"ensum. Qui sensus cum sit planus et apertus, et textui maxune consentaneus (nondum enim exhortationi, sed doctrinae adhuc intendit Apostolus), apparet Graecorum codicum lectionem esse veriorem: praesertim cum huic sensui aptissime congniat illa clausula, per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, videlicet tanquam mediatorem et pacificatorem nostrum; cumque etiam verba subsequentia, habemus, stamus, gloriamur, ejusdem sint modi indicativi. Detorquent hunc locum sectarii ad stabiliendam eam, quam ab unoquoque credente exigunt, reconciliationis ac salutis suae certitudinem infallibilem. Sed id faciunt imperite. Nam pax reconciliationem significat, non autem ejus certam notitiam. Itaque pacem habere potest cum Deo, qui tamen propter occultas latebras sui cordis non omnino certus sit, quod eam habeat. Nec aliud affirmat Paulus, quam justificatos hanc pacem habere.
5:2
2. Per quem et habemus accessum per fidem in gratiam istam. Habemus accessum. Graece, TipocaYcoyTjv laxTgxajjisv, id est, aditum seu admissionem habere nobis contigit. Sensus Apostoli: Cujus opera ac merito admissi et adducti sumus per fidem ad hanc gratiam, id est, beneficium justificationis. Utitur eadem voce Tcpocaywi"}] scribens ad Eph. 3. Porro notandum, etsi fides sit initium et pars quaedam nostrae justificationis, recte tamen et convenienter dici, quod per fidem habemus accessum et ingressum ad gratiam justificationis: quomodo per ostium ingredimur domum, quamvis ipsum ostium pars domus sit. Sensus enim est: fide, velut initio justificationis, eo nos ulterius adduci, ut caeteris donis accedentibus simpliciter justi simus, ac Deo accepti ad vitam aeternam; quemadmodum intrando per ostium eo quis promovetur, ut sit intra domum, in aula aut in conclavi.
In qua stamus, et gloriamur in spe gloriae filiorum Dei. Dubiuui tam in Graeco, quam in Latino, num ad fidem illud in qua referendum sit, an ad gratiam. Si ad fidem, sensus erit: per quam stamus, quomodo nonnulli verterunt. Ita dictum 2 Cor. 1.: Nam fide statis. Verumtamen contextus magis exigit, ut ad gratiam referatur: In qua gratia, inquit, stamus, id est, manemus, persistimus: in qua, id est, de qua, etiam gloriamur sub spe et certa exspectatione futuraegloriae, quae praeparata est et per hanc gratiam praestanda filiis Dei adoptivis. Quidam hanc partem, et gloriamur in spe etc, retrahentes a praecedenti, sic exponunt: et gloriamur de spe futurae gloriae, id est, de ea re sperata; sicut mox sequitur, gloriamur in trihulationihus, id est, de tribulationibus. At minus recte. Nam quod bene animadverit Toletus, in Graeco diversae sunt praepositiones iv et eTTt, quarum prior servit significando gloriationis objecto seu materiae, non posterior. Unde et in parte sequenti, gloriamurin tribulationibus, non est 871:1^ sed sv. Sciendum quoque est genitivum filiorum non esse in Graeco, nec in Syriaco, neque a Graecis tractatoribus exponi. Sed et commentator Ambrosius etCyprianus lib. de exhort. martyrii cap. 9. praetermittunt. Sic enim habet Cyprianus: Gloriamur in spe claritatis Dei. Cujus tamen lectionis sensus a priori non variat. Nam gloria Dei filiis ejus adoptivis communicatur.
5:3
3. Non solum autem. Ellipsis, Paulo frequens, pro eo, quod diceret: Nec id solum. Non solum, inquit, gloriamur de eo, quod dixi, id est, de gratia ista.
Sed et gloriamur in trihulationihus. Id est, de afflictionibus, pressuris ac persecutionibus, quas propter hanc gratiam, id est, quia Christiani sumus, patimur. Gloriamur, inquam, de iis secundum spiritum, tanquam de magno bono: licet infirma caro doleat. Sic Apostoli Act. 5. ibant gaudentes a conspectu concilii, quod digni habiti essent pro nomine Jesu contumeliam pati. Hinc et Jacobus admonetcap. 1. dicens: Omne gaudium existimate, cumintentationes, id est tribulationes, varias incideritis. Nam tribulationes summopere confirmant spem electorum, quam habent de gloria futuri saeculi. Probat hoc Paulus subjuncta gradatione.
Scientes, quod tribulatio patientiam operatur;
5:4
4. Patientia autem probationem, probatio vero spem. In hoc h)co eloquentiam Pauli, sapientiae comitem, minimeque affectatam, observavit Augustinus lib. 4. de doct. Christ. cap. 7. Partem hancTertullianus in Scorpiaco cap. 13. ita reddit: Certi, quod pressura tolerantiam perficit, tolerantia vero probationem etc. Hilarius quoque locum hunc citans, perficit, pro operatur, legit in enarratione Psal. 138. Siquidem in Graeco compositum est verbum xaTspyaCctai,^ quod intendere videtur significatum simplicis. Verum constat usurpari saepe pro simplici, ut observare est hujus epistolae cap. 7. et alibi. Quocirca noster interpres bene reddidit, operatur. Erasmus et alii, parit, gignit. Tribulatio patientiam operatur, quia nobis proficit ad patientiam. Est enim nobis materies et occasio patientiae exercendae, atque etiam augendae. Patientia probationem operatur, quia reddit eum, qui affligitur, probatum et exploratum, ut cognoscat quanti Deum et coelestia faciat, simulque eum magis ac magis repurgat ab affectibus vitiosis. Unde passim in Psalmis et alibi dicuntur justi, velut aurum, a Deo probari per tolerantiam afflictionum. Probatio vero spem gignit, excitando eam et augendo. Qui enim jam expertus est, se nullis adversis a justitia et virtute fidei dimotum esse, etiamsi varie tentatus sit, mirum in modum erigitur animo in spem gloriae coelestis. Ex hoc loco disce contra sectarios, spem nostram et fiduciam non ita niti solis divinis promissionibus, ut non etiam fatendum sit, eam inniti testimonio bonorum operum, quae Deus dederit. Unde idem Apostolus 2 Cor. 1. Gloria nostra, inquit, haec est, testimonium conscientiae nostrae. Movere potest lectorem, quod secundum membrum hujus gradationis Apostolus Jacobus cap. 1. invertere videtur. Dicit enim: Scientes, quod probatio fidei vestrae patientiam operatur. Sed quomodo non pugneat haec duo^ quia breviter dici non potest, in ejus loci commentario declarabitur.
5:5
5. Spes autem non confundit, Graece ■/,azaioy/jvzi, id est pudefacit, pudore afficit: quod vulgatus interpres more sin saeculi, etsi parum Latine, passim vocat confundtre. Sensus: Spes, usque ad eum modum excitata et aucta, sperantem non pudefaciet, non fallet; non frustrabitur ille spe sua. Nam praeter hoc, quod spes ex parte Dei promittentis, cujus verbo nititur, prorsus est infallibilis; etiam pignora, c[nae jam praerogavit, mirifice fiduciam excitant in liumine consequendae hereditatis. Quam rem urget Apostolus hoc loco. In scripturis frustratio spei vocatur confusio, idest, pudefactio; quia, qui frustrantur exspectatiune, solent pudefieri ac rubore suffundi. Porro quamvis sermonem hic esse constet de spe justificatorum, tamen et spes hominis adhuc peccatoris, dum evangelio credens exspectatvitam aeternam ex operibus bonis, quae per Dei gratiam se facturum sperat, non eum confundet. Sed confundet et frustrabit se ipsum, si bona opera negligat exercere; cum alioqui teneat certissimam Christi promissionem: Hoc fac, et vives. Luc. 10. Verum potiori ratione spes justorum, praesertim electorum, in quorum maxime persona Pcaulus loquitur, non confundit. De qua Ecclesiasticus cap. 2.: Nullus speravit in Domino et confusus est. Nam sequitur: Quis enim permansit in mandatis ejus, et derelictus est? Denique spem caritate formatam intelligi, docet proliatio sequens.
Quia caritas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris per Spiritum sanctum, qui datus est nobis. Diffusa est, Graece exxe/UTai^, effusa est. Cyprianus legit: infusa, sensu non diverso. Potest autem intelligi vel caritas Dei erga nos, vel ea, qua nos Deum diligimus; id est, vel Dei diligentis^ vel Dei dilecti. Nam utroque modo charitas Dei in scripturis accipitur. Priori quidem modo hujus epistolae cap. 8. juxta meliorem intellectum: Quis nos separabit a caritate Christi? Et iterum: KuJla creatura poterit nos separare a caritate Dei. Item 2. Cor. 5. Caritas Christi urget nos. Et manifestius iu fine ejusdem epistolae: Caritas Dei sit cum omnibus vobis. Item Ephes. 3.: Scire etiam supereminentem scientiae caritatem Christi, et 1. Joan. 3.: In hoc cognovimus caritatem Dei, ijuoniam lUe animam suampro nobis posuit, et iterum cap. 4.: In hoc apparuit caritas Dei in nobis, quoniam filium suum unigenitum etc. Posterioris exempla sunt Lucae 11.: Praeteritis judicium et caritatem Dei. Joan. 5.: Dilectionem Dei non habetis in vobis. 2 Thess. 3.: Dominus dirigat corda vestra in caritate Dei. 1 Joan. 3.: Qui viderit fratrem suum necesse habere, et clauserit viscera sua ah eo, quomodo caritas Dei manet in eo? et cap. 5.: Haec est caritas Dei, ut mandata ejus custodiamus. Et ineadem ejjistolasaepius. Jam priori modo si caritas Dei hic accipiatur, sensus et connexio erit hujusmodi: quod dixi spem nos non confundere, patet utique ex caritate, quam Deus nobis copiose exhibuit, effundendo in nos Spiritum sanctum, tanquam pignus haereditatis promissae, per multiplicia dona, quae nobis impertivit. Nam ex acceptis confirmamur et certi reddimur de futuris. Hunc sensum probabilem faciunt, quae sequuntur de Dei et Christi erga nos dilectione; ubi etiam aperte caritas Dei, qua nos diligit, nominatur illis verbis: Commendat autem caritatem suam Deus nobis. Si posteriori modo accipiatur, erit hic sensus: Spes nostra non fallit nos, quia caritas, quae praestat, ut Deum diligamus, et diligendo bona promissa assequamur, diffusa est in cordibus nostris per Spiritum sanctum, qui nobis ad sanctificationem datus est; ac si dicat: qui jam dedit nobis caritatem, per quam mereamur bona promissa, certissime etiam daturus est in caritate perseverantibus, id est, electis suis, ipsa bona, quae promisit. Prior expos^itio est apud Chrysostomum et Theophylactum, quos sequuntur Cajetanus et F. Toletus. Posteriorem tradil imprimis x^ugnstinus, cum alibi, tum apertissime lib. de spiritu et litera cap. 32. ita scribens: Caritas Dei dicta est diffundi in cordibus nostris: non qua nos ipse diligit, sed qua nos facit dilectores suos: sicut dicitur justitia Dei, qua nos justi ejus munere efficimur, et Domini salus, qua nos salvos facit. Hanc eandem expositionem videre est apud Primasium et Hervaeum, aliosque Latinos, a quibus nec Theodoretus dissentit, dum caritatem hanc interpretatur Spiritus sancti gratiam, quam per baptismum accepimus, Porro alii utramque expositionem in medium adferunt: primum Origenes (cujus verba Sedulius quoque in sua collectanea compegit), tametsi is priorem expositionem potius probare videtur. Deinde glossa ordinaria, P. Lombardus, ac B. Pererius: qui quidem singulari opinione censet utrumque sensum esse literalem hujus loci. Nonnulli vero ambigue loquuntur, nec mentem satis explicant, ut commentator Ambrosius, Primasius et Oecumenius. At demum posteriori intellectui favere videtm- id, quod in synodo Tridentina sess. 6. cap. 7. dicitur, per Spiritum sanctum diflFundi caritatem in cordibus eorum, qui justificantur, atque ipsis inhaerere: quodque Theologi ex hoc loco scripturae, tam contra magistrum Sententiarum, quam contra nostri temporis haereticos imputativae justitiae assertores, statuunt habitum caritatis creatae et inhaerentis: quamvis et juxta alteram expositionem id ipsum, saltem ex consequenti, statui potest, ut ostendit Cajetanus, et ante eum Origenes. Nam caritatis Dei in cordibus nostris effusio, secundum effectus divinae erga nos caritatis Intelligi debet, id est, secundum dona Spiritus sancti nobis collata ac nobis inhaerentia; quemadmodum ipse Paulus exponit, quum addit: per Spiritum sanctum, qui datus est nobis. Unde fit consequens, in nobis esse, et cordibus nostris inhaerere caritatem reciprocam erga Deum. Nam praecipue dari nobis dicitur Spiritus sanctus propter donum" caritatis, quod et caeteris Spiritus sancti charismatis excellentius est, ac maxime necessarium, 1 Cor. IB. Huc facit locus similis apud Joannem Apostolum 1 epistolae 3., ubi sic ait: Videte quaJem caritatem dedit nobis Pater, ut filii Dei nominemur et si^nus. Dedit, id est, praestitit, exhibuit; ut Dei caritas inteUigatur, qua nobis dedit esse filios Dei, quod non sumus nisi per donum caritatis erga Deum reciproce. Quae cum ita sint, non existimo, pro sensu posteriore contentiosius certandum esse. Satis sit, utrumque probabilem haberi. Caeterum adverte non esse dictum accusativo casu, diffusa vel effusa est in corda nostra, sed in cordibus nostris, ablativo casu, qui Graecis est dativus, sicut in Psal. 44.: Diffusa est gratia in labiis tuis. Plus enim hoc casu significatum est, quam accusativo diceretur. Significatur enim, ut grammatice loquar, motus in loco, quo fiat, ut caritas sese fundat atque dilatet in cordibus hominum. Unde ait 2 Cor. 6.: Cor nostrum dilatatum est.
5:6
6. Ut quid enim Christus, cum adhuc infirmi essemus, secundum tempus pro impiis mortuus est? Graeca sine interrogatione legunt hoc modo: eii yap Xpiaxbi, ovTCOv tJuwv ao9^cVu>v. Adhuc enim Christus, exsistentibus nobis infirmis. Sed ordo est: Nam Christus, cum adhuc nos infirmi essemus. Suspicio est, interpretem pro Ixi legisse elc, zi, id est, ad quid, vel potius t^va li, quod multis locis tam in Psalmis, quam in novo testamento voculatim reddit, ut quid. Ac nihilominus ETi ab eo lectum fuisse saltem posteriore loco, arguit ipsa versio: cum adhuc etc. Caeterum sive cum interrogatione pericopen hanc legas^ quomodo veteres Latinos legisse constat, sive particula interrogationis remota, confirmatio est supradictorum effectuum et ornamentorum ex eo, quod pro nobis adhuc impiis mortuus fuit Christus, ac si dicat: quanto magis jam ad se conversis et reconciliatis et amicis sua beneficia cumulabit? Hoc enim argumentum inculcat in sequentibus. Illa pars, secundum tempus, quamvis ad id, quod praecedit, referatur a nonnullis, rectius tamen sequentibus jungitur. Quod facit Hieronymus in epistola ad Algasiam quaestione 7., ubi locum hunc pertractat. Theophj-laetus item, et Oecumenius in commentariis. Rectius, inquam, quia Graece non est yp6\o^, sed xatpoCj quae vox significat tempus opportunum ad aliquid agendum. Jam vero scripturae testantur non uno loco, Christum definito, completo, et nt Hieronymus interpretatur, opportuno tempore venisse in carnem, et mortuum esse. Sensus igitur est: Christi tantam erga nos fuisse caritatem, ut pro nobis, quando adhuc eramus infirmi, hoc est variis peccatorum languoribus detenti, et proinde etiam impii, id est, injusti et peccatores, mori non dubitaverit tempore a Patre constituto. Est autem haec probatio consequentiae praecedentis, quae talis erat: Tanta est Dei caritas erga nos, ut dederit nobis Spiritum sanctum, quo ex inimicis facti sumus amici; igitur non frustrabit nos spe promissionis aeternae gloriae. Sequelam probat, quia si, cum adhuc peccatores essemus, adeo nos dilexit Christus, ut pro nobis mortem oppeteret: quanto magis nobis jam justificatis et amicis praestabit caetera, quae promisit? Haec argumentatio statim ab ipso Paulo pluribus verbis explicatur. Quoniam autem infirmitatis vocabulum, Graece ao&lvsiaj in epistolis Paulinis frequens est, et variae significationis, operae pretium putavi, et hoc loco opportunum, si de ea re paucis lectorem instruxero. Proprie quidem significat ea vox adversam corporis valetudinem, ut 1 Cor. 11.: Sunt inter vos multi infirmi. Verumtamen ad alios tum corporis, tum animi, tum aliarum quoque rerum defectus multipliciter in scripturis transfertur. Corporis quidem, ut quoties pro mortalitate et corruptibilitate sumitur, vehit 1 Cor. 15.: Seminatur in infirmitate, surget in virtute, et 2 Cor. ultimo: Crucifixus est Christus ex infirmitate. Item pro vilitate et contemtu, ut 2 Cor. 10.: Praesentia corporis infirma. Item pro afflictione et miseiia, quibus homines vulgo contemptibiles et viles effici solent. Sic Pauhis afflictiones suas et persecutiones in eadem epistola cap. 11. et 12. identidem infirmitates vocat. Et simili quadam ratione plagae Aegy])tiae dictae sunt infirmitates Deut. 7. Quo pertinet et ilhid Ecclesiastae 5.: Est et alia infirmitas pessima, id est, miseria. Quum vero ad animum refertur, saepe quidem dolorem Hebraeis significat, propterea quod animus dolore languescat, velut morbo; ut Hosee 4.: Lugebit terra, et infirmabitur omnis, qui habitat in ea. id est dolebit. Et Amos cap. 6.: Nihil patiebantur super contritione Joseph • Hebraice, non infirmabantur, id est, non dolebant. Item Micheae 4.: Dole et sctage filia Sion; Hebraice, infirmare, et 1 Machab. 1.: Juvenes et virgines infirmati sunt, id est, doluerunt. Alias autem praecipuum humanae naturae defectum seu corruptionem sigrificat, id est, peccatum, ut Psal. 6. Mise^ere mei, Domine, quoniam infirmus tum, id est, peccator. Haec significatio praesentis est loci. Nam quos infirmos vocet ea parte, cum adhuc infirmi essemus, mox repetendo declarat, ubi ait: cum adhuc peccatores essemus. Nec alios judicare voluit Dominus ea sententia, qua dixit: No7i est opus valentibus medico, sed male habentibus. Huic affine est, cum significat peccandi pronitatem, ut Matth. 26.: Spiritus promptus est, caro infirma; et apud Paulum in his seuteutiis priori loco: Factus sum infirmis infirmus, 1 Cor. 9. Quis infirmatur, et ego non infirmor? 2 Cor. 11. Sic fere infirmitas Heb. 5. et 7., ubi eam Levitico sacerdoti adscribit, et cap. 4., ubi Christus describitur pontifex, qui compati possit infirmitatibus nustris. Peculiariter autem infirmi quibusdam locis Apostolo dicuntur Christiani, qui in fide nondum satis erant instructi et roborati, ut exempli gratia. qui cibis iramolatitiis aut lege vetitis coinquinari se putabant. Loca sunt hujus epist. 14. et 15. et 1 Cor. 8. et 9. Dicitur et ille infirmari, qui infirmis sese accommodat, ut in posteriori membro duai-um sententiavum, quas paulo ante citavi. Denique tiansfertur ad res inauiraatas, ut cum legalia vocat apostolus infirma et egena elementa, Gal. 4. Alibi haereditas et vitis infirmata dicitur, id est, afflicta et attenuata, Psal. 67. et Jesaiae 24. Sed haec sufficiant. Nunc ad textum Apostoli redeamus.
5:7
7. Vix enim pro justo quis moritur. Collatione, quod dixit, amplificat. Moritur, Graece aizo^avBliai, morietur, id est, mori paratus sit Hieronymus in epistola ad Algasiam, justum abstractive justitiam, seu rem justam, interpretatur. Verum simplicior et germanior Apostoli sensus est, quem alii reddunt: Vix reperiri aliquem inter mortales, qui pro justo homine liberando velit se dare in mortem. Nam inter personas collationem facit, justum scilicet et impios.
Nam pro bono forsitan quis audeat mori. Graece quis etiam audetmori. Inter justum et bonum distinguit commentator Ambrosius, quod bonus natura quis dicatur, justus exercitio. Melius illi, qui justum intelligunt reddentem cuique, quod suum est, bonumvero, qui beneficus sit, ac bene de multis meritus. Nam homines beneficiis affecti citius vitam exponant periculo pro benefactoribus quam pri> aliis, quantumlibetjustis. Itaque sensus hic probabilis est. Ac nisi discrimen aliquod indicare vellet Apostohis inter justum et bonum, quorsum mutaret vucabulum? Plerique tamen, fateor, non distinguunt, et sensum hunc faciunt: Dico vix reperiri, qui pro justo moriatur; non simpliciter nego reperiri, quia forsitan reperiatur aliquis, qui id faciat, id est, pro justo et bono homine etiam mori audeat, sustineat, in animxTm inducat. Sic enim verbum audeat exponendum. Ostendit hic locus, salvo ordine caritatis, alium pro alio recte vitam im- ])endere temporalem. Obiter admoneo, locum hunc ab anti- (juis haereticis Marcione et Ario prave intellectum fuisse, quemadmodum refert Hieronymus in epistohi memorata. Nam Marcion justum intelligebat Deum legis et Prophetarum, bonum vero Deum Evangeliorum et Apostolorum: et pro justo quidem dicebat, vel nullos, vel paucos oppetivisse mortem; pro bono autem Deo ejusque filio Christo innumerabiles martyres exstitisse. Arius vero justum referebat ad Christum, qui constitutus est a Deo judex vivorum et mortuorum: bonum autem ad Deum patrem; de quo filius ipse confitetur: Nemo bonus, nisi unus Deus. Quo nimirum commento significare volebat fiHum non esse bonum aeque ut patrem, sed participatione tantum bonitatis patemae. Verum haec ut haeretica sunt et impia, ita ab instituto et contextu sermonis Apostolici prorsus ahena, ut in iis refellendis non sit haerendum.
5:8
8. Commendat autem, caritatem suam Deus in nobis. Graece, in nos, id est, erga nos.
Quoniam, cum adhuc peccatores essemus, secundum tempus Christus pro nobis mortuus est. Male quidam codices s^i interposito legunt: Quoniam si, cum adhuc etc, tametsi ita legitur apud Cyprianum epistola 52., sed citantem haec verba revulsa a superioribus, ut opus illi fuci'it addere si, quemadmodum et Hilario enarranti Psalmum 55. Illud quoque, secundum tempus, huc ingestum videtur e h)Co superiore simili. Nam Graeca,Syriaca, Latina potiora, veteres concordantiae non habent, ut nec Cyprianus, nec Hilarius. Sed et Irenaeus lib. 3. adversus haereses cap. 18., et Augustinus lib. 4. de Trinit, cap. 1., ac rursum lib. 13. cap. 10. versum hunc absque ea particula citant. Est autem totius periodi sensus: magna quidem caritas apud homines aestimatur, si quod rarissimum est, pro justo aut bono quis oppetat mortem. At Deus suam erga nos caritatem commendat ac testatam facit, attjue humana caritate h)nge majorem ostendit in eo, quod pro nobis injustis et peccatoribus Chrishnn fihuui suum mori vohiit. Utrum hinc sequatur, majoris esse meriti dilectionem inimicorum quam amicorum, videat studiosus apud commentat. magistri Sentent. Hb. 3. dist. 30. Porro notandum est particuhun adhuc tam hoc loco quam superius, ubi ait: cum adhuc infirmi essemus, pertinere potius ad significandum statum cujusque hominis, que remedium mortis Christi sit ei necessarium^ quam ad certum aHquod tempus. Ut enim homines non uno tempore existimt, ita nec uno tempore sunt aut fuerunt infirmi et peccatores. Similis ratio de adverbio nunc in sequentibus.
5:9
9. Multo igitur magis nunc, justificati in sanguine ipsius, salvi erimus ab ira per ipsum. Salvi erimus, Graece a(})\}r,a6ixz\}a, salvabimur. Hilarius legit liberabimur in expositione Psalmi 2. Collectio est a minori. Si enim mortuus est Christus, ut nos peccatores justificaret, ergo multo magis pnstquam per ejus sanguinem, idest, passionem, qua suum sanguinem profudit, justificati sumus, per ipsius ejusdem merita servabimur in extremo judicio ab ira divina, id est, vin dicta et punitione in impios exercenda. De hac enim ira Dei jam supra locutus est cap. 1. 2. 3. et 4. Quare sectarii, dum ex hoc loco docere conantur, homini per Christi sanguinem justificato nullam amplius restare luendam poenam temporalem, nec in hoc saec:ilo, nec in futuro; plane detorquent Apostoli verba in alienum et pravum sensum. Porro sequelam hanc confirmat periodus sequens:
5:10
10. Si enim, cum inimici essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem filii ejus; multo magis reconciliati, salvi erimus in vita ipsius. Salvi erimus, Graece aojOryao/jis&a^ ut in parte praecedenti. Si enim, inquit, per mortem filii sui nos inimicos suos sibi reconciliavit, quanto magis in vita ejusdem filii sui nos jam reconciliatos et amicos salvaturus est? P^xtensio est sx;perioris argixmenti, duplicata antithesi, videlicet inter inimicos et reconciliatos, id est, amicos, et inter mortem filii Dei et vitam ejus. Quaeres, quomodo dicat Deo reconciliatos, quos semper etal) aetenio dilexit? Responsio: quia, cum prius propter peccata essemus obnoxii irae ejus, id est, digni, in quos justam vindictam damnationis exerceret, per gratiam justificationis ab illo i-eatu liberavit, ac dignos fecit sui regni consortio. llaec enim mutatio tota in nobis est, non in illo, qui innnutabiliter ab aeterno suis electis praeparat ea gratiae suae beneficia, quae conferat eis in tempore. Porro quod dicit, in vita ipsius, alii aliter exponunt. Mihi sensus videtur: filio ipsius jam vivente, nec amplius morituro, vel, quod eodem redit: per filium ipsius jam viventem etc., praesertim cum ad dexteram ipsius sedens etiam interpellet pro nobis, ut dicitur infra cap. 8. Quamvis enim illud, in vita, possit etiam verti 2)er vitam, ut fecit Erasmus, diversis tamen praepositionibus usus est Apostolus dicendo, per mortem et in vita, quia in priori pretium significatur et meritum redimentis, in posteriori status ejusdem feliciter Tegnantis, ad quem per suam passionem et mortem evectus est, id est, vita immortalis et gloriosa, tanquam dicat Apostolus: si nos inimicos reconciliavit Patri Christus patiens et moriens, quanto magis reconciliatos salvabit vivens et regnans? Porro tota haec Apostoli argumentatio eo potissimum tendit, ut doceat spem electorum, qui jam justificati et probati sint, non confundere.
5:11
11. Non solum autem. Quidam supplent ex eo, quod longius antecessit, gloriamur in tribulationibus; alii de proximo verbum salvi erimus; alii participium reconciliati; quod tertium maxime congruit sequentibus, ut patebit.
Sed et gloriamur in Deo per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, per (juem nunc reconciliationem. accepimus. Gloriamur, Graece y.aoyo)ixevoi, gloriantes, ut participium participio respondeat, non solum reconciliati, sed et gloriantes. Sensus enim est: quanto magis salvi erimus, qui non solum (quod jam dixi) reconciliati sixmus Deo, ut peccata nostra non puniat, sed etiam gloriamur in Deo per Jesum Christum Dominum nosi trum, cujus beneficio ac merito nunc reconciliationem accepimus; gloriamur, inquam, in Deo, velut patre, cujus filii factsumus adoptione per gratiam reconciliationis, velut omnis nostrae justitiae, i-econciliationis et renovationis autore. Sicenim ui Deo gloriandum esse passim docet et hortatur Apostolus.
5:12
12. Propterea, sicut per unum hominempeccatum in hunc mundum intravit. Graece et Syriace, in mundum intravit. Pergit ostendere magnitudinem caritatis Christi erga homines. Id nunc facit repetens rem ipsam ab altiori principio, nempe ex eo, quod humanum genus in peccatum et mortem transgressione primi parentis delapsum fuit; unde factum, ut Christo indigeret reparatore ad justitiam et vitam. IgiUir hic jam nobis aperit et exponit originalem causam corruptionis humani generis. Illud propterea, Graece 5'.a touto^ propter hoc, vim habere videtur voculae causalis, ac si diceret: nam sicut per unum hominem, etc., ut sit confirmatio ejus, quod proxime dixit: Per quem Christum reconciUationem accepimus. Id enim probat: quia sicut per Adam sumus in peccatum lapsi, ita per Christum ad justitiam reducti. Porro sententiam hanc, adjunctis vsrbis sequentibus, iu se ipsa completam esse, quidam volunt, reddentes eam ad hunc modum: sicut per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum, sic et per peccatum mors, etc, ut sit comparatio ingressus peccati per unum hominem cum ingressu mortis per peccatum. Qualis est locutio, quum dicimus in oratione dominica: Fiat voluntas tua, sicut in coelo, ef in terra, id est, sic et in terra. Suggerit hanc complementi rationem Er,ismus, et probat Gaignaeus. Aliter Stapulensis. Vult ennn particulam et secundo loco superfluam esse, dicitque in nonnullis Graecis non haberi. Proinde sic vertit: Sicut per unum hominem peccatum in mundum intravit, et per peccatum mors, ita in omnes homines mors pertransiit. Verum ea Graeci cujuspiam exem*plaris lectio nec a R. Stephano est annotata, nec alium legi, qui meminerit. Deinde nec mihi probabiles sunt hae constriictiones, quia neutra comparatio facit ad praesens institutum. Nam ut dictum est, et ex sequentibus patet, intendit Apostolus comparare primum hominem cum secundo, id est, Adam cum Christo. scilicet ea comparatione, quae fit per antithesim; ut si dicas: sicut Adam nocuit humano generi, ita Christus profuit. Quapropter alii censent orationem esse inabsolutam, ut cui desit altera pars comparationis, hoc aut simili modo supplenda: sicut per unum hominem peccatum, et per peccatum mors intravit in mundum, sic per unum hominem, videlicet Christum, justitia, et per justitiam vita in mundum intravit. At vero Cajetanus negat textum esse mancum, sed sententiam hanc totam dicit esse suspensam, ita ut alterum membrum comparationis, intercedente longo hyperbato, differatur usque ad eum locum: Igitur sicut per unius delictum, etc. Illic enim, priori membro de Adam resumpto, redditur alteium de Christo. Quanquam id ante Cajetanum etiam Augustinus observavit et admonuit in expositione propositionis 29. Quod ad intellectuna praesentis loci attinet, Pelagius in suo commentario, et sequaces ejus, quo originale peccatum excluderent, interpretati sunt, peccatum in mundum intrasse per unum hominem forma et exemplo, quia primum hominem peccantem posteri ejus peccando secuti sunt, et exemplum ejus velut formam propositam imitati. Id ipsum satis aperte docet Theodoretus in comm. hujus hjci, ita demum subjungens: Non enim propter primi parentis peccatum, sed propter suum unusquisque decretum suscipit. Quod et repetit in dialogo 3., qui dicitur impatibilis. Ac nimis temere etiam Erasmus in ejusmodi sensum propendet, tam in paraphrasi, quam in annotationibus, Origenem, ut apparet, autorem seoutus. Quamvis enim Origenes in suo commentario varius est et lubricus, potissimum tamen immoratur in explicanda et exaggeranda peccati imitatione, et de ea accusat ommes antiqui saeculi justos, al) A1)el usque ad Abraham. Verum S. Augustinus, adversus Pelagianos disputans, contendit ac multis i-ationibus ostendit, hunc locum non recipere aliam iuterpretationcm, quam de ingressu peccati per propagationem, nec nisi absurde de imitatione posse accipi. Primum, quia Paulus primum hominem opponit Christo: sic enim per primum hominem peccatum, sicut per Christum justitia. Non est autem per Christum justitia propter solam imitationem; uam et antiqui, qui Christum praecesserunt, ideoque eum imitari non potuerunt, justificati sunt per Christum, et justitia Christi contingit etiam parvulos, qui omnino non possunt imitari. Quare nec per primum hominem peccatum propter imitationem. Sed sicut Christus occulta inspiratione gratiae nos justos facit, ita et Adamus occulta tabificatione naturae nos constituit peccatores. Quod si de imitatione senno erat Apostolo, non Christum, sed Abel, vel Enoch, vel alium quempiam ex antiquis justis potius Adamo debuisset opponere; quem scilicet omnium saeculorum homines juste vivendo possunt imitari. Quamquam imitari non dicitur, quisquis agit aliquid, quale alius prior fecit; nam proprie nullus imitatur, quod non cognovit, etiamsi id alius prior fecerit. Sed imitari dicitur ille, qui factum alterius cognitum sibi pro exemplo statuit et proponit, ut simile faciat. Atqui plurimi sunt et fuerunt gravissimi peccatoresj qui de peccato primi hominis nihil audierunt; qui proinde, etsi peccando similes ei fiant, non tamen ab eo peccandi formam et exemplum accipiunt, quomodo Pelagius loquitur. Unde nec eum imitari dicendi sunt, nisi forte qiTadam imperfecta ratione; quatenus ille peccando praecessit, isti secuti sunt. Verum si de hujusmodi imitatione hic sermo esset, potius dicendum erat, per diabolum peccatum intrasse in mundum, quia ille omniuui primus peccavit. Ab initio enim diabolus peccat, 1 Joan..S., ac de eo scriptum est: Imitantur tUum, qui sunt ex parte ejus, Sap. 2. Deinde sicut per unum hominem peccatum intravit in mundum, ita et mors; atqui ingressus mortis intelligi non potest per imitationem, ergo nec ingressus peccati. Postremo, si imitationem Apostolus intelligeret, n^n diceret in consequentibus: Judicium €X uno in condemnationem, sed ex multis; quomodo dixit: Gratia autem ex multis delictis in justificationem. Has fere rationes adversus istum Pelagii de imitatione commentarium adducit Augustinus variis locis, ut lib. 1. de baptis. parvul. cap. 8. 9. 10., lib. 4. contra duas epist. Pelagian. cap. 4., serm. 14. de verbis Apost., et epistiJa 89. ad Hilar., nec non aliis a venerabili Beda diligenter collectis. Ex quibus simul efficitur, non nisi de propagatione peccati posse locum hunc intelligi, quemadmodum Augustinus concludit. Ac ne dubitemus veram hanc esse interpretationem, jam Augustini tempore definitum est apatribusConciliiMilevitani can. 2. non aliter intelligendum esse, quod dicit Apostolus: Per unum hominem, elc., quam de peccati originalis traductione, quemadmodum, inquiunt, Ecclesia catholica ubique diffusa semjjer intellexit. Quem canonem iisdem verbis repetivit synodus Tridentina sess. 5. can. 4. Nunc igitur ad explicationem verborum Apostoli veniamus. T^bi primum refellendi sunt, qui unum hominem in his verbis non Adam intellexerunt, sed Hevam, quod haec prior illo, atque omniumhomiuum prima peccaverit. Ita namque sentiunt Pseudambrosius et Pelagius. Sed manifestis argumentis redarguuntur. Primum, quia Paulus in sequentibus exponit, quem primum hominem dixerit; Adamum semel et iteram suo nomine exprimens. Deinde, quia Pauli intentio est, hunc hominem, de quo loquitur, per antithesim comparare cum Christo, id est, primum hominem cum secundo. Id enim facit tam hoc capite in iis, quae sequuntur, quam in 1 epist. ad Cor. 15. Hoc autem in Hevam minime quadrat. Adde, quod, etsi in sententiis generalibus saepe masculinum genus complectatur foemininum, tamen neque lex grammatica permittit, neque mos habet scripturae, ut foemiua, si de ea singulariter sermo sit, significetur genere masculino. Sed jam quaeritur, qiaomodo dicat Apostolus per unum hominem, id est, Adamum, cum etiam per Hevam, quae prior peccavit, peccatum et mors ingressa fuerint in mundum. Haec enim multorum Patrum sententia est, eademque scripturis consona, ut Ecclesiastici 25.: A tiiuliere initium factum est jjeccati, et per illam omnes morimur. Et Psal. 50.: In peccatis concepit me mater mea. Unde et propter corruptionem naturae filii Hevae vocamur. Respondetur, id nihil obstare, quo minus per unum hominem vere dictum sit. Nam vir in generatione principalior est, ct quamvis mulieris ad generandum egeat consortio, cum ea tamen est una caro, sicut scriptum est: Erunt duo in carne una. Gen. 2. Sic quippe et de posteris Abrahae dicit Apostolus Heb. 11.: Propter quod et ab uno, scilicet Abraham, orti sunt. Quo tamen loco constat Saram, quae virtutem in conceptione seminis accepit, non excludi. Cum ergo dicitur, per unum hominem, etsi Heva nec significatur, nec comprehenditur, non tamen excluditur. Significatur enim unus homo, utestprincipium generationis, quod esse non potuit absque muliere. Qua de re S. Augustinus in altero opere contra Julianum, citante Beda: Ideo per unum hominem, inquit, peccatum intravit in mundum, quia per semen generationis intravit, quod a viro incipiens concipit foemina. Quo more nasci noluit, qui solus siyie peccato est natus ex foemina. Vide eundem August. lib. 1. de baptis. parvnl. cap. 16. et Hugonem quaest. 132. Sed nunc sensum Apostoli dicamus. Sicut, inquit, per unum hominem, scilicet Adamum, qui erat totius humani generis parens ac principium a Deo constitutus, peccatum in mundum, id est, in universum genus humanum, intravit propagatione, quia nimirum ille unus et primus homo, praevaricando Dei mandatum, totam suam posteritatem peccato reddidit obnoxiam, atque in se tanquam in radice vitiavit. Mundum exponimus universum genus humanum, id est, omnes homines ex Adam carnaliter piopagatos. Sic enim Apostolus se ipsum exponit, quum statim subjicit; Et ita in omnes homines mors pertransiit. Eadem est interpretatio B. Augustini in Enchiridio cap. 26. et aliis locis innumeris; denique omnium Patrum orthodoxorum. Quod enim Origenes mundum interpretatur locum, in quo habitant homines, vel terrenam hanc et corporalem vitam, minus cpadrat cum sententia Pauli. Peccatum accipitur generaliter, sed proprie tamen, ut significet id omne, quod veram culpae rationem habet, sive sit actuale, sive habituale, sive quid aliud; sed hic verificatio fit de peccato, quodpropagatur, id est, de peccato originali. Hoc autem non est ipsa actualis Adae transgressio, quae non nisi in illo esse potuit, et in eo deleta fuit per poenitentiam, sed peccatum, in quo et cum quo singuli ejus posteri nascuntur. Quod etsi Adae peccatum sit, id est, ejus voluntate factum, ideoque et origine unum, propagatione tamen transfusum omnibus inest, quemadmodum loquitur ac definit Tridentina synodus can. 3. Unde et Augustinus lib. 1. retract. cap. 13.: Illud, inquit, quod in parvulis dicitur originale peccatum, cum adhuc non utantur libero arbitrio voluntatis, non absurde vocatur etiam voluntarium, quia, ex primi hominis mala voluntate contractum, factum est quodam modo haereditarium. Haec Augustinus. Utrum autem iliad peccatum sit concupiscentia, cum quo nascimur, ut sentit passim Augustinus, et eum secutus Petrus Lombardus, aUique docti, an originaUs justitiae privatio, ut vult Anselmus, quem multi sequuntur scholastici, an vero quid aliud, disputatur a Theologis, et a nobis disputatum est in 2. lib. sent. dist. 30. Certe Tridentina Synodus, etsi quaestionem hanc non definiverit, in eo tamen, quod docet cau. 5. concupiscentiam in renatis non esse peccatum, facit intelligi, eam in non renatis esse peccatum, nec aliud quam originale. Jam quod hoc h)Co peccati nomine, neque poena peccati, neque reatus peccati, id est, obligatio ad poenam ex peccato orta, ut quidam putarunt, sed verum peccatum intelligatur, certo liquet, vel ex ipsis Apostoli verbis, quibus distinguit peccatum et mortem, quae poena peccati est, ipsumque peccatum justitiae Christi opponit; deinde ex Arausicani concilii can. 2., cujus verba repetit sjmodus Tridentina sess. 5. can. 2., quo definitur Adam sua transgressione non tantum mortem et poenas corporis in humanum genus transfudisse, sed et peccatum, quod mors est animae. Ac postremo ex ejusdem sess. can. 5., quo asseritur ac definitur, baptismate tolli totum id, quod veram et propriam peccati rationem habet. Hinc enim manifeste sequitur peccatum originale, quodcumque demum illud sit, priusquam baptismate tollatur, veram et propriam peccati rationem habere. Quam eandem doctrinam multis locis apud S. Augustinum explicatam reperies.
Et per peccatum mors, scilicet intravit in mundum. Mortem corporis intelligit, non quidem primi hominis, ut nonnulli volunt, sed mortem corporis in genere, cujus causa fuit in primo homine, quemadmodum et de peccato dictum est. Dicitur enim mors in mundum intrasse per peccatum, quia peccato in mundum introducto simul et mors introducta est in mundum, id est, in genus humanum, infligente eam justo judice Deo, qui dixerat: In quocumque die comederis ex eo, morte morieris Geu. 2. Quidam mortem exponunt mortalitatem, id est, moriendi necessitatem. Sed nulla est hajus expositionis necessitas, cum simpliciter ipsa mors possit intelligi, ut et in sequentibus usque ad finem hujus capitis. Sub ea tamen et mortalitas et aliae communes corporis miseriae comprehenduntur. Sicut enim Adam per peccatum non solum secundum animam, sed etiam secundum corpus in deterius mutatus est, ita in omnes posteros eandem utramque corruptionem transmisit. Quod totum contra Pelagianos jam olim definitum exstat in concilio Arausicano can. 1. et 2., et pridem repetitum in concilio Tridentino sess. 5. can. 1. et 2. De Pelagii sententia docet ipsius commentarius, ubi, ne mortem corporis ex peccato ortam fateri cogatur, locum hunc de morte animae vult intelligi, quam quisque, dum peccat, incurrit. Sentit enim, primum hominem ab initio mortalem factum fuisse, ita ut, sive peccaret, sive non peccaret, moreretur in corpore, non peccati merito, sed necessitate naturae; ut loquitur, errorem illum condemnans, Milevitanum concilium can. 1. Etenim mortem corporis hic intelligi debere contextus Apostolicus planissime evincit. Id ipsum ostendit locus similis 1 Cor. 15.: Per hominem mors; per hominem re~ surrectio mortuorum. Et sicut in Adam omnes moriuntur, ita et in Christo omnes vivificabuntur. Denique probat illa comminatio primo parenti facta de ligno: vetito, Genes. 2.: In quocumque die comederis ex eo, morte morieris, videlicet ea morte, de qua, posteaquam peccaverat, ei dicitur cap. 3.: Pulvis es, et in pulverem reverteris.
Et ita in omnes homines mors pertransiit. Tanquam dicat: et haec est causa (quia nimirum primus pareus peccatum et mortem introduxit), quod in omne genus humanum mors pervaserit. Notandum est apud commentatorem Amb. et Sedulium tantummodo legi: Sic et in omnes homines pertransiit, ut vel mors, vel peccatum subaudiri possit. Eadem lectio est Augustini passim, quam et vidimus in ms. codice pervetusto monasterii Laudensis. Et quamvis Pelagius legisse videatur, mors pertransiit, quemadmodum et Primasius, Pelagiani sensus hoc in loco corrector, alii tamen Pelagiani, quorum in codicibus dictio mors non exstabat, subintelligi volebant non peccatum, sed mortem; ut refert Augustinus lib. 4. contra duas epist. Pelag. cap. 4., simxil insinuans utrumque subintelligi posse. Quod et repetit in secundo opere scripto contra Julianum, citante Beda. Quamquam necesse non est, etiam peccatum hic intelligi, cum peccati in omnes homines transitum tam praecedentia, quam sequentia Apostoli verba manifeste declarent. Sane Graeci codices et commentatores vulgatae nostrae lectioni constanter volunt. An autem haec pars aliquam admittat exceptionem, in iis saltem, quos extremi judicii dies occupabit viventes, quaeri posset. Sed de eo vide suis locis, ut 1 Cur. 15., 2 Cor. 5. et 1 Thessal. 4. illud constat, mortalitatem et mortis debitum ad omnes omnino pertinere, quos Adam traxit in culpam.
In quo omnes peccaverunt. In quo, id est, in Adam, ut communiter intellexerunt Latini et Graeci interpretes. Sensus autem est: in quo Adamo peccante omnes constituti sunt peccatores. Sic enim se ipsum Paulus exponere videtur, cum infra dicii,i^odi per inobedientiam unius hominis peccatores constituti sunt multi. Non potest illud in quo, scp' w^ referri ad peccatum, ut sensus sit: in quo primi hominis peccato omnes peccaverunt. Qui sensus aliquando placuit Augustino. Repugnat enim genus apud Graecos, nam (t.\).OL^zia. foemlnini generis est. Quod et Augustinus postea animadvertit, et sententiam correxit lib. 4. contra duas epist. Pelag. cap. 4. Dicuntur autem omnes peccasse in Adam, tanquam in principio et radice totius generis, quoniam in lumbis ejus erant, quando ille peccabat. Unde S. Augustinus: In quo, inquit, omnes peccaverunt, quando omnes ille unus homo fuerunt. Dicit hoc lib. 1. de baptis. parvul. cap. 10., et repetit lib. 3. cap. 7. Item lib. 2. de nupt. et concupisc. cap. 5. et in epist. 106. ad Paul. Id vero sic intellige: quia tunc, quando ille propria voluntate peccavit, in quo, tanquam in principio generis, omnes erant, cauca data est, per quam deinceps universum genus inficeretur, et singuli constituerentur peccatores, videlicet a suo quisque peccato, quod ex illa origine contraheret; quomodo, si pater attaminatus lepra filios gignat leprosos, dicentur filii facti leprosi in patre, licet unusquisque siiam ex illo contrahat lepram; tametsi comparationem hanc non per omnia respondere, satis ex antedictis intelligi potest. Porro locum hunc Erasmus ita vertit: quatenus omnes peccaverunt, quod et interpres Chrysostomi secutus est. Quae versio ita demum tolerari potest, si id non de actualibus peccatis, per quae homines primum hominem peccatorem imitari dicantur (qui commentarius jam ante exclusus est et reprobatus), sed de originali peccato singulorum intelligatur, ut sit sensus: mortem pervasisse in omnes, ob eam rationem, quia et peccatum in omnes transiit. Qui sensus Cajetano placuit, nec a Sasbo Ido rejicitur. Sciendum tamen, nuUos vetustos interpretes, nec Latinos, nec Graecos, particulam illam, in quo, per quatenus exponere, sohim inter Latinos si demas Pelagium, et inter Graecos Theodoretum, a sensu Pelagii, sicut ex supradictis satis apparet, haud longe recedentem. Pelagii haec verba sunt: In quo omnes peccaverunt, hoc est, in eo, quod omnes peccaverunt, exemplo Adae peccant. Photius quidem Graecus similiter interpretatus est, Oecumenio verba ejus referente. Ex quo Joannes Gaignaeus eadem Graeca depromsit, et in haec Latina convertit: In hoc, inquit, ipsi Adam comrnorimur, quod ipsi compeccamus; et ille quidem itiitium dedit, nos vero, inde sumpta occasione, non modo malum non sumus aversati, sed adjutores etiam illi fuimus. Ita Photius, a Gaignaeo plus satis hac in parte laudatus, cum sit autor recentior, idemque gravi schismate fuerit ab ecclesia Romana divisus. Certe Oecumenius suis verbis ac sensu Apostolum ita exponit: In quo Adam, vel per quem Adam, omnes peccaverunt. Quod convenit cum expositione prius allata. Nec minus aperta sunt verba Theophylacti: hi quo, id est, in Adam. Qui duo autores etiam Chrjsostomum, quem Hbenter sequuntur (quamvis alioqui paulo obscurius h)cutum), in eandem sensum accepisse videntur. Nec vero pro versione Erasmiana adeo muhum facit praepositio Graeca, quam in hac phrasi, qua dicitur £9' Oi, censent esse causalem, ut sit idem, quod quatenus, in quantum, qua ratione. Constat enim Apostolum Paulum in epistolis et Lucam in actis indifferenter uti interdum tribus hisce praepositionibus kTz\, Iv et eiQ, pro una Latina praepositione in. Quod et alias annotavimus. Quamquam etiam hic causa significatur, cum dicitur, in quo Adam. Certe paulo post, ubi nos legimus, in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae, Graece est, em x(p OfiOKujjiaTi^, iti similitudine, sicut hic, in quo; licet alias dicere soleat ev 6fxoicG|JiaTt, ut supra cap. 1. et infra cap. 8. et ad Philip. 2. Sic Act 2.: Baptizetur unusquisque vestrum in nomine Jesu Christi, Graece £711 Tcu ov6iJ.azi, quod passim dicitur £V ToJ ov6|jiaTt^ et interdum bIq t6 o^vojaa^ ut Matth. 10. et 28. Sic etiam Heb. 9.: i7i cibis etpotibus, ac rursum: Testamentum iti mortuis confirmatum est. Utrobique Graece STit. Quae loca nec Erasmus aliter vertit. Jam etiam hic quaeri potest, utrum sine exceptione verum sit Apostoli dictum: In quo omnes peccaverunt. Ad quod breviterrespoudeo: si scripturam sacram, si totam ecclesiasticae traditionis antiquitatem consulimus, nihil inveniri, quo minus universe verum sit, omnes omnino homines, qui communi lege generationis, id est, per concubitum maris et foeminae, et proinde secundum concupiscentiam carnalem ex Adam orti sunt aut orituri, in Adam peccasse. Solum Christum Deum et hominem, qui non sic natus est, sed nova ac singulari per virginem nativitate venit in mundum, ut quod in Adam cecidit, in suis electis ipse erigeret ac restauraret, immunem ab illius contagio fuisse. Sic enim ille primus homo, quemadmodum ait Augustinus Enchirid. cap. 26., stirpem suam, quam peccando in se tanquam in radice vitiaverat, poena mortis et damnatione obstrinxit, ut, quidquid prolis ex illo et simul damnata, per quam peccaverat, conjuge, per carnalem concupiscentiam nasceretur, traheret originale peccatum. Unde scribit idem Aug. lib. 1. de nupt. et concup. cap. 12., propterea Christum, qui sine peccato futurus erat, sine carnis concupiscentia concipi voluisse, ut hinc etiam doceret omnem, quae de concubitu nascitur, carnem esse peccati, quandoquidem sola, quae non inde nata est, non fuit caro peccati. Cum autem haec et plurima alia apud Augustinum aliosque sanctos Patres exstent testimonia, quibus non solum exceptionem nullam faciant in hac, quam tractamus, Apostoli Pauli sententia, verum etiam exceptionem omnem apertis verbis excludant atque removeant, mihi certe, cui propositum est sanctorum inhaerere sensibus et doctrinis, exceptionem aliquam in ea facere, religio est, utcumque alii quidam, quos non judicamus, aliter hac de re sapiant.
5:13
13. Usque ad legem enim peccatum erat in mundo. De peccato generaliter loquitur, ut etiam actualia comprehendat, quorum omnium fons et fomes est originale peccatum, sive ea sint transgressiones, sive non. Quocirca non est hic soUicitus, ut hoc peccatum ab actualibus secernat, a quibus utique in adultis separatum esse non potest. Igitur nunc ostendit Apostolus, posteaquam peccatum semel ingressum est in mundum, semper in mundo fuisse et regnasse, etiam ante legem, videlicet eam, quae data est per Moysen. Nam qui legem hic intelligunt naturalem, ut Origenes, et si quis alius, aberrant a mente Pauli. Plane enim liquet ex sequentibus, eum loqui de lege scripta atque Mosaica. Nec admittendum Origenis supplementum, usque ad legem peccatum fuisse mortuum in mundo, id est, usque ad aetatem ratione utentem, qua lex naturalis incipit innotescere, peccatum in pueris mortuum esse, sic ut eis imputari non possit. Audax enim et violenta est haec additio. Quare de lege Mosaica, quae omnium fere expositio est, Apostohuu loqui non dubitemus. Augustinus quidem sic exponit: usque ad legem, id est, etiam lege lata, peccatum permansit. Neque enim lex profligare potuit peccatum e mundo, ut propterea alio remedio fuerit opus, quo peccatum toUeretur. Juxta quem sensum tacite hic indicatur necessitas petendae et exspectandae justitiae a Christu. Alii vero sic: non solum tempore legis, quando maifesta est transgressio, verum etiam ab initio usque ad tempus, quo lex data est, peccatum (erat iu mundo. Hic sensus simplicior est, et ad scopum Apostoli superius indicatum accommodatior. Denique ei probe respondet, quod sequitur:
Peccatwn autem non imputabatur, cum lex non esset- vel, ut habent codices mss. non pauci, iidemque Graecis consentientes: Peccatum autem non imputatur, cum lex non est. Connexio talis est: erat quidem etiam ante legem peccatum in mundo, sed non imputabatur, quia, ubi lex non est, peccatum non imputatur. Negat Apostolus sine lege peccatum imputari, non simpliciter; sic enim ante legem justi fuissent omnes, juxta illud: Beatus vir, cui non imputabit Dominus peccatum; sed imputari ad transgressionem, quia sicut dictum est capite superiori: Ubi non est lex, nec praevaricatio. Quo etiam loco expusitum est, quid transgressionis, seu praevaricationis numine signiticetur. Negat, inquam, peccatum, ubi lex non est, imputari ad transgressionem. Cujus rei argumentum est, quod filii Israel, quamvis et in Aegypto, et in deserto ante datam legem frequenter et graviter peccaverint, partim idola colendo, quod scriptura testatur Ezech. 23. et J(;6. 24., partim murmurando contra Deum et Moysen, non tamen puniti leguntur aliqua puena, seu plaga manifesta. At vero statim jjost legem et legis comminationes publicatas, cum primiun et quoties peccabant, ut in cultu vituli, aliis(]ue modis, mox eos ultio divina consecuta est; secundum ilhid capitis superioris: Lex iram operatur. Sed quaeris: si non imputabatur peccatum ante legem, quomodo tam graviter a Deu punitum legitur, ut nunc mundum diluvio deleret, nunc Pentapulim incendio 6Dil. £>th Comiii. Tom. L subverteret, Cain vagus et profugus esset super terram, Chanaan servituti fratrum subjectus, Her et Onan a Domino percussi? Responsio patet ex dictis. Nam puniti fuerunt hi omnes, non ob transgressionem legis alicujus a Deo positae (neque enim data erat lex), sed propter violata jura naturae peccatis tam magnis tamque manifestis, ut ultiunem provocarent ejus, qui autor est naturae. Porro quidam sic interpretantur hanc partem: ubi lex non est, peccatum non agnosci, nec reputari peccatum, scilicet a peccante; per legem enim cognitio peccati, supra cap. 3. Sed non videtur hic esse sensus Pauli, qui imputationem semper intelligit eam, quae fit ab alio, ut patet imprimis ex capite praecedenti, deinde ex aliis locis^ ut 2 Tim. 4.: Omnes me dereliquerunt, non illis imputetur. Et ad Philem.: Si aliquid nocuit tibi, aut debet, hoc mihi imputa. Jam quod nonnulli partem hanc ita supplent: Peccatum non imputabatur ad mortem, quando lex non erat, primum mihi recedere videntur a consueta significatione verbi imputare in scripturis, de qua capite superiore; quia peccatum vera aestimatione non est mors, licet mortem mereatur. Deinde constat, non omnem poenam transgressorum legis Mosaicae esse mortem, quibus tamen omnibus suum peccatum ex mente Pauli imputari dicitur, videlicet ad transgressionem, propter quam subjiciuntur poenis a lege constitutis.
5:14
14. Sed regnacit mors ab Adam usque ad Moysen. Quamvis, inquit, ante legem peccatum nun imputabatur, erat tamen in mundo, et propter hoc mors ob peccatum invecta regnavit, id est, grassata est, tyrannidem exercuit in genus humanum, etiam toto eo tempore, quod leo-eni dataiu antecessit. Id enim est ah Adam usque ad Moysen. Nam per peccatimi mors, sive ilhid imj^utetur, sive non.
Etiam in eos, qui non peccacerunt in simiUtudinem praecaricationis Adae. Graece, in similitudine. et itu scriptum habebatur in codice Laudensi. Sensus tamen idem est: ad similitudinem. Admonet Augustinus libro 1. de baptismo parvulorum cap. 11. et in epistola 89. ad Hilarium, quosdam Latinos codices absque negatione legere, qui peccaverunt. Atque eam lectionem interpretatur Ambrosius commentator, ac veram esse contendit, asseverans Graecos codices in quibus negatio)egitur apposita, vitiatosesse. Sed et Origenes afiinnantem lectionem multis verbis exponit, tametsi ad extremum fatetur, sive ipse, sive Ruffinus ejus interpres, in quibusdam exemplaribus negationem haberi. Quae negativa lectio sine dubio verior et sincerior est. Nam affirmativae redamat particula copulans etiam. Quis enim sensus: etiam in eos, qui peccaverunt? quasi potius regnare mors debuerit in eos, qui non peccaverunt. Et tamen particulam etiam legit Origenes; licet et hanc supprimant Latini codices, de quibus Augustinus, et inter hos Ambrosianus. Verum non ob aliud erasa fuit negatio, quam quod non intelligeretur, quomodo mors regnaverit in eos, qui non peccaverunt, maxime quia dictum erat paulo ante, in Adam omnes peccasse. Certe testatur Augustinus, codices Graecos aut omnes, aut paene omnes, negationem habere. Chrysostomum quoque et caeteros expositores Graecos negationem legisse, docent eorum commentarii. Legit et Cyrillus lib. 1. et 12. super Joan., et his omnibus antiquior Irenaeus lib. 3. contra haereses cap. 2. Quod ad Latinos attinet, negationem constanter legit Hieronymus, ut libro 3. dialogi contra Pelagianos sub finem, et in epitaphio Nepotiani, et in epistola ad Paulam super obitu Blesillae. Denique Latini commentatores, excepto Pseudambrosio, de quo diximus, et Sedulio, qui tamen etiam negativae lectionis meminit, eandemque exponit. Hodie quidem in omnibus tam Latinis (quod Hieronymianae con-ectioni acceptum refero), quam Graecis habetur negatio, suffi-agante etiam textu Syriaco. Porro ea lectio duobus modis exponi potest. Aut enim sensus est, mortem regnasse, non in eos tantum, qui propria voluntate peccaverunt, primo parenti, qui praeceptum Dei sua voluntate transgressus est, ea in re similes facti; verum etiam in infantes, qui non peccaverunt propriae voluntatis actu, sed tantum ex Adam nascendo peccatum contraxerunt. Haec Augustini expositio est locis memoratis; item Hieronymi lib. 3. dialogi contra Pelagianos, et Latinorum posteriorum. Aut sensus est, mortem regnasse etiam ante legem datam, et proinde in eos etiam, qui non erant praevaricati legem aliquam sibi a Deo positam, sicut Adam fecerat, praevaricando praeceptum sibi datum a Deo, sed solum peccaverunt in legem naturae. Hic sensus, quem Graecorum commentarii suggerunt (quem etiam adfert et probare videtur Augustinus propositione 29.), cum praecedentibus optime quadrat, et omnino germanus apparet. Ac sane videri potest Apostolus allusisse ad locum Hosee 6., qui sic habet: Ipsi autem sicut Adam transgressi sunt pactum, id est, non ex ignorantia peccaverunt, ut legem non habentes, sed sicut Adam praevaricatus est expressum pactum, quod cum eo statui in paradiso, sic et isti legem, quam eis per Moysen dedi, transgressi sunt colendo falsos Deos. Igitur ad eum modum dicit Apostolus mortem regnasse in eos, qui legem non habebant, et per hoc non sunt praevaricati instar Adae; quomodo dixerat capite 2.: Qui sine lege peccaverunt, sine lege peribunt, ut sint eadem peccare sine lege, et peccare non in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae; quemadmodum et e diverso eadem sunt peccare in lege, et peccare in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae Non posse autem intelligi eos, qui simpliciter non peccaverunt ullo modo, manifestum est, quia jam dixerat: In quo omnes peccaverunt. Et in superitribus: Causati sumus omnes sub peccato esse. Item: Omnes peccaverunt et egent gloria Dei. Unde impi-obabilisfit ea constructio hujus loci, quam adfert Chrysostomus, ita inquiens: Quomodo regnavit? Ad similitudinem transgressionis Adam. Cujus et Augustinus meminit propositione supra dicta, etsi non probet. Si enim haec pars per hyperbaton (ut ajunt, quibus haec sententia probatur) ad verbum regnaoit referatur, absolute ponitur illud, in eos, qui non peccaverunt. Quod pugnat cum dictis, ut taceam de sermone parum commodo. Non enim apte dicitur, mortem regnare ad similitudinem transgressionis Adam, sicut homines ad eam similitudinem peccare. Nam quod urgent Graecam praepositionem £7:1^ qua dicunt causam denotari, jam alias docuimus has praepositiones Iv et IttI promiscue subinde in scripturis usurpari.
Qui est forma futuri. Qui Adam est forma, Graece xuTiO!;^ futuri, id est, figuram gerit ejus, qui venturus erat, scilicet Christi, quem alibi vocat novissimum Adam, 1 Cor. 15. Sentit Apostolus, Adam fuisse typum et figuram Christi jjer comparationem a contrario, ut Augustinus loquitur. Sunt enim Adam et Christus velut duo principia mutuo opposita respectu hominum. Per Adam enim peccatum et mors intravit in mundum; per Christum justitia et vita. Quae res paulo post pluribus declaratur. Poterat alioqui ilhid TO'j ^^cAAovtoq^ futuri, neutro genere accipi, id est, ejus quod futurum est, sed sensu nihil ad praesens institutum faciente. Porro commentarius Pelagrii hoc loco totus Pelagianus est, omnia ad imitationem referens. Verba ejus sunt: Forma Christi Adam factus est. Sicut enim Adam, primus mandatum Dei praevaricans, exemplum est legem Dei praecaricare colentibus, sic et Qhristus, voluntatem Patris complens, exemplum est imitari eum cupientibus. Sed hunc sensum, quem et in sequentibus inculcat, satis supra expugnavimus. Quoniam autem haec forma non ex omni partt conformis est, ut ait Augustinus in secundu opere contra Julianum, ideo sequitur:
5:15
15. Sed non sicut delictum, ita et donum. Subaudi verbum est, vel, se habet, aut quod ejusmodi. Ostendit in comp£^ratione jam dicta dissimilitudinem osse, quod non omnino similiter procedant haec duo, peccatum Adae, et donum seu gratia Christi, de quo supra dixerat: Per quem nunc reconciliationem accepimus. Non similiter, inquam, e contrario comparata, id est, peccatum Adae in mahim, et gratia Christi in bonum, quum haec illo sit multo potentior et efficacior. Delictum hic et in sequentibus vocat quod superius peccatum. Non enim distinguit in hac praesenti disputatione inter a;xccp-''av peccatum, et TiapaTr-ojiia delictum. Quod vel inde patet. Nam infra cum dixisset, legem subintrasse, ut abundaret t6 7i:apaTXT0j;i.a^ id ipsum ita resumit: Ubi autem abundavit vj aaaptia. Quod manifestum est argumentum promiscuae usurpationis harum vocum. Quare ex hac voce 7iapa'7;Ta),ua nQn bene colligit quidam, hic non significari delictum sive peccatum Adae, sed delictum seu casum totius generis. Nam certe peccatum unius Adae significari, palam ostendit, quod sequitur:
Si enim unius delicto multi mortui sunt, multo magis gratia Dei et donum in gratia unius hominis Jesu Christi in plures abundaoit. Probatio est dictae dissimilitudinis, quam prosequitur usque ad illud: Igitur sicut per unius delictum etc. Docet autem donationem Christi, cum noxa Adami comparatam, praecellere, sive considerentur charismata, quae dantur, sive peccata, quae condonantur. Priorem modum hic attendit, posteriorem parte proxime sequenti, ac postremo utramque differentiam conjungit. Quae analjsis est Augustini in expositione propositionis 29. Quamquam aliis placet tertio loco repeti tantum et explicari id, quod prlmu dixit. In gratia unius hominis, Graece, in gratia, quae est, sive fuit, unius hominis. Item, in plures, Graece in multos; quemadmodum reHqua parte capitis eandem vocem constanter verti* interpres, ut ne quem moveat haec mutatio multorum in phires; quasi phires per Christum sint salvati, (^uam in Adam inortul; quum res contrario modo potius sese habeat. Abutebantur autem hac lectione Pelagiani, dicentes ideo de gratia ChristiPaulumdixisse, quod in plures abundavit, quia protenditur etiam adparvulcis, qui peccatum Adae imitari non potuerunt. Qua de re Augustinus, Imjus nostrae lectionis ignarus, ita scribit in opere secundo contra Julianum verbis a Beda citatis: Quod dixhti, vigilanter inculcasse Apostolum: multo magis gratia Dei et donum in gratia unius hominis Jesu Christi in plures abundavit, volens inteUigi ideo plures dictos, quia pervenit gratia ejus ad parvuJos, ad quos imitatio primi hominis nun pertinet, aut Viendosus codex tibi mentitus est, aut ipse mentiris, aut ab aJiquo falso sive fallente, aut oblivione deceptus es. Non enim ait Apostolus plures, sed multos. Graecum attende codicem, et invenies uoAAfjhr, non nXstatouc. Dixit ergo muUo magis abundasse gratiam in multos, non in magis muUos, hoc est, non inplures, sicut jam ostendimus. Haec Augustinus. Patet igitur, Apostolum non hic multitudinem eorum, qui gratiae Christi participes fiunt, urgere, sed copiam beneficiorum Christi, quae significatur in eo, quod dicit, muUo magis. Est igitur sensus: Nam per unius quidem hominis delictum seu transgressionem multi, id est, omnes ex eo propagati, mortem incurrunt; vevum multo magis per gratiam unius hominis Jesu Christi, id est, propter ejus merita, Deus in multos, scilicet omnes electos, vel omnes ad Christum pertinentes, gratiae suae dona largiter eflPundit. Siquidem Adam suo delicto mortem invexit, at Christus per suam gratiam multa et magna Spiritus sancti dona, atfjue ipsam immortalitatem, hominibus conciliat; adeoque phis gratiae nobis restituit, quam in Adam perdidimus, videHcetj''st"tiaeperseverantiam,etvitam aeternam. Haec enim Adam in paradiso non liabult. Rursus ex hoc loco statuUur peccatum proj agatiouis ccntra Pelagianos. Nani, ut annotavit Argustinus, ]hrasis scripturae sacrae non patitur, ut dicamus Adam esse mortuum delicto diaboli, licet illud imitatus sit, sicut hic unius Adae delicto multi mortui dicuntur. Quare non de imitatione id intelligendum, sed de propagatione. Sed quaeres, cur multos dixerit in priori parte, cum dicere posset omnes. Respondeo, vel ideo quia de praeterito loquebatur, aiX£9avov, mortui fuerunt; ve\ potius ut conformitas esset prioris membri cum posteriore. Sic infra utrosque nunc omnes dicit, nunc multos. Vide ibi commentarium.
5:16
16. Et non sicut per unum peccatum, ita et donum. Graece: Et non sicut per unum, qui peccavit, donum, seu donatio. Consentiunt Latina quaedam mss., nec non textus Ambrosii antiquioris editionis, quae non peccatum legunt, sed peccantem, ut verisimile sit, interpretem Latinum hoc modo vertisse. Est enim in Graeco participium praeteriti temporis, (:uo Latini carent. Augustinus quoque lib. 1. de bapt. parv. cap. 12. et epist. 89 et propos. 29. legU peccantem. Quibus locis etsi varient exemplaria, tamen etiam aj)ud Bedam in collect. ex Augustini lib. de bapt. parv. peccantem legitur. Ipse vero Beda textum Apostoli referens nunc peccatorem, nunc peccantem legit. Porro Syrus quidem hoc modo vertit: Et non sicut delictum unius, ita donum. Sed id fecit ut paraphrastes. Est igitur imperfectus sermo, maxime ut Graece a Paulo scriptus, quem hoc modo supplere et exponereliceat: Neque enim, sicut per unum hominem, qui peccavit, mors venit in mundum, ita et donum Christi sese habet; ac si dicat: Non sicut ex unius hominis una transgressione mors intrnducta est, ita Christi gratia ab uno tantum peccato, ejusque poena liberat. Hunc sensum dechirant verba sequentia:
Nam judicium quidem ex uno in condemnationem, gratia autem ex muUis deUctis in justificationem. In Graeco vocum allusio est, xptjuta, y.axaxpifia, quae Latine reddi non potest. Illud, ex uno, vel inteHge, delicto, ut vult Augustinus eo, quod sequatur, ex muUis deUctis; vel ex uno peccante. Hoc enim praecesserat. Qnamqnam sensus eodem recidit. Nam si intelligas, ex uno peccante, formaliter id accipiendum erit, id est, in quantum peccavit. Condemnati07iem yevo mortis dicit, quam in superioribus expressit, de qua etiam mox se ipsum exponit. Igitur sensus est: Nam judicium quidem Dei ex uno primi hominis peccato, vel quia unus ille homo peccavit, processit ad condemnationem mortis. Gratia vero Dei non ex uno delicto, sed ex multis eductos ac liberatos jastitia donat, quia non tantum remittit unum illud Adae peccatum, sive ab eo contractum, quod singulis inest, sed insuper remittit multa peccata a posteris Adae mala ipsorum voluntate superaddita. Hanc porro dissimilitudinem comparationis inter Adam et Christum amplius adhuc illustrat Apostolus sequentibus verbis:
5:17
17. Si enim unius delicto mors regnavit per unum. Male quidam codices: Si enim in unius delicto, scilicet addita praepositione in, quae nec in Graecis est, nec in omnibus Latinis, et sensum impedit magis quam adjuvat.
Multo magis abundantiam gratiae et donationis et justitiae accipientes, in vita regnabunt per unum Jesum Christum. Et donationis et justitiae. Graece, et doni justitiae, sinemediacoujunctione, nisi quod in paucis legitur, et donum justitiae. Caeterum Augustinus tantum legit abundantiam gratiae et justitiae, lib. 1. de bap(ismo parvul irum cap. 13., et sic a Beda citatur in collectaneis Ita quoque legitur apud Irenaeum lil». 3. cap. 18. Sensus periodi: Si per unum hominem, quatenus nimirum unus ille deliquit, ct eo contagio posteros infecit, mors pervasit humanum genus, multo magis, qui per Christum acceperint exuberantiam donorum, quibus a peccatis justificati atque in justitia priivecti fueritit, in aeterna vita regnabunt per eundem unnra hominem, primo homini op})iisituui, scilicet.Tesura Christum. Repeticivi est prioris differentiae, nisi quod hic jam expressius morti vitam opponit, eam scilicet, qaae justitiae per Christum acceptae merces sit futura. Ubi notandum est, cum dixisset: mors regnavit per unum, non tamen eum e diverso dixisse, vitam regnaturam per unum Jesum Christum; sed dixit ipsos justificatos iii vita regnaturos, tum quia jucundius sonat, si dicantur ipsi homines regnaturi, quod quidem regnum etiam scriptura justis promittit Matth 25. et alibi; tum quia sic loquendo voluit quandam etiam dissimilitudinem innuere inter mortem et vitam, sicut fecerat inter delictum et doaum. Nam mors ita regnat, ut perdat eos, super quibus regnat; vita autem sic regnabit in nobis, ut reges faciat, id est, coelestis regni cum Christo consortes. Observa, lector, Apostolum hoc capite fere indifferenter et promiscue usurpare quatuor vocabula Graeca, /^p-C, X^?'^^*> iiupia, ^tup/jiia. Quorum priraura nosrer interpres vertit gratiam; secundum nunc donum, nunc gratiam; tertium nunc donum, nunc donationem; quartum vero donum. Quibus vocabulis pro rei, quae dicitur, exgentia, modo significatur beneficentia Dei, modo actus donandi, modo res ipsa donata. Qaod perspiciet, qui singula suis locis expendet.
5:18
18. Igitur, sicut per unius delictum in omnes homines in condemnationem. Redit ad comparationem Adae et Christi, indicatam illa parte: qui est forma futuri, eamque recolligit ex jara dictis. Ac simul supplet, quod imperfectnra reliquerat, ubi dixit: Propterea, sicut perunum hominem etc., addeado, quod sequitur:
Sic et per unius justitiam in omnes homines in justificationem vitae. Per unius justitium, Graece, per unius justificationem; et ita vertit paulo ante Graecam vocem Si/aiojtjLa. Verum tam hic, quam illic recte intelligitur justitia. Sic Apoc. 19.: Byssinum justificationes sunt sanctorum, id est, justitiae, justa opera. Diversum verbale est in eo, quod sequitur, in justificationem vitae: Graece, ^ixa^cuaiv. Seasus hujus loci est: Jam ex iis, quae de Adam et Chi*isto diximus, liquet, quod, sicut per unius Adae inobedientiam malum seu peccatum propagatum est in omnes homines ex illo genitos, trahens eos ad condemnationem mortis, ita et per unius Christi justitiam, id est, justas et sanctas ejus actiones, ac nominatim obedientiam, qua patri obedivit usque ad mortem, bonum seu gratia pervenit, et quasi propagatur in omnes homines, qui sunt ex parte Christi, ad efficiendam in eis justitiam, qua perducantur ad vitam aeternam; ac si dixisset, ad justificationem vitalem seu vivificam. Dixi, nominatim obedientiam, quia hanc nominat in parte sequenti. Porro signum universale, omnes, in utroque membro positum, non omnes eodem modo exponunt. Pelagius quidem neutro loco vult universaliteraccipi. Numquid, inquit, iniquus Deus, qui infert iram? Absit. Quomodo potest unius delicto Adae omnes homines condemnare, cum nec unius Christi justitia omnes homines justificati sint? Omnes autem dicens, non generaliter dicit, sed uniuscujusque partis significatmultitudinem. Haec ille haeretico sensu, quo negat peccatum originale. Quidam neotericus universalitatem posteriore hjco sic restringit: m omnes homines, si veJint, quasi non et ipsum velle sit opus gratiae Christi, Paulo attestante Philipp. 2.: Deus est, qui ojjeratur in vobis velle. Proinde restrictio hujusmodi, quam nec ajjud alium quemquam legi, prorsus improbanda est. Alius quidam vir doctus utrobique absolutam universalitatem intelligit, sed justificationem vitae interpretatur resurrectionem ad vitam, quae communis erit etiam malis, allegans alterum Pauli locum, vehit ejusdem cum isto sententiae, ex 1 Cor. 15.: Sicut in Adam omnes moriuntur, ita et in Christo omnes vivificabuntur. Sed istorum verborum veram intelligentiam suo loco trademus, huic certe loco sensus ille non nisi violente coaptari potest. Etenim justificatio nusquam in scripturis, imo nec extra, ad hunc modum accipitur, ne quidem, si addas, vitae. Rursus alii, ut universalitatem servent eandem in utroque membro, posterius sic exponunt: per unius justitiam omnes homines justificati, quantum ad sufficientiam attinet. Sed et hoc praeter mentem Apostoli, qui comparat delictum Adae cum justitia Christi quantum ad effectus utriusque, non quantum ad causarum sufficientiam. Quod si cui minus placet expositio signi universalis, quam dedimus, poterit dicere, per omnes homines in utroque membro intelligi genus humanum, non tamen eadem amplitudine acceptum, sed juxta rem subjectam. In priori quidem membro plane generaliter, quoniam ibi sermo est de parente totius generis, per quem mors in omnes invecta sine exceptione. In posteriori autem secundum modum loquendi, quo saepe utitur scriptura, dicens omnes homines, quum vult intelligi passim multos, ut Luc. 6.: Vae vobis, cum benedixerint vobis omnes homines. Act. 22.: Eris testis illius ad omnes homines. Coloss. 1.: Corripientes omnem hominem, et docentes omnem hominem. Et Tit. 2.: Apparuit gratia Dei saUatoris nostri omnibus hominibus, id est, generi humand. Quod alias, simili locutione, significatur nomine mundi, vel totius mundi, ut Joan. 3.: Sic Deus dilexit mundum, et hujus epistolae cap. 1.: Fides vestra annuntiatur in universo mundo. Sit igitur hic sensus probabilis: Sicut per unius delictum in genus humanum condemnatio mortis, sic per unius justitiam in genus humanum justificatio vitae. Sed Immanum genus distingue, quemadmodum dixi.
5:19
19. Sicut enim per inobedientiam unius hominis j^eccatores constituti sunt multi. Graeca variant in persona, /atso-zd{)r^\xzv, constituti sunnis; alia, xaTS- (JTd^riOav, constituti sunt; quod magis convenit cum tota serie sermonis Apostoli. Tta et per unius obeditionem justi constituentur multi. Idem aliis verbis inculcat, velut doctrinam maximi momenti. Differentia tamen est iuter bauc sententiam et superiurem, quod in illa praecipue considerantur effectus,.mors et vita; in hac vero peccatum et justitia, peccatum ut causa mortis, justitia ut causa vitae. Deinde quia haec interpretatio quaedam est superioris, ut admonet Theophylactus. Nam peccatum Adae interpretatur Apostolus inobedientiam, et justitiam Christi obedientiam. Unde recte ab eo sumitur haec sententia tanquam probatio et declaratio qiraedam ejus, quod praecessit. Nec te moveat, quod nunc multos vocat, quos prius omnes dixerat, nec fallat commentarius Theodiireti dicentis: ideo Paulum usum vocabulo multi etiam in priori parte, quod et in Adae posteris inveniantur aliqui, qui a majoribus peccatis alieni fuerint, ut Abel, Enoch, Noe, Melchisedec et patriarchae, aliique in lege clari et insignes; quasi dicat, hos non comprehendi sententia ApostoH, quia non fuerunt primae transgressiunis imitatores. Quae erronea est expositio, et refelliturj quia non solum dicit Apostolus, multos constitutos esse peccatores, sed et supra dixit, multos esse mortuos, cum constet mortem ad omnes pertinere. Multos ergo dicit, quos aute dixit omnes, tum quia omnes homines revera multi sunt, tum quia non omnes absolute per Christum justificantur, sed omnes secundum sensum modo dictum. Nota etiam, Apostolum id, quod prius peccatum et justitiam dixerat, nunc in-.bedientiam et obedientiam vocare; ex quo intelligitur de actuali peccato Adae, deque actuali justitia Christi Paulum fuisse locutum. Vocatur autem Adae peccatum inobedientia, non quod ex contemptu praecepti divini processerit, sed usurpato nomine inobedientiae pro transgressione, qua nimirum peccatur contra legem positivam atque expressam, qualis erat illa: De ligno scientiae boni et mali ne cotnedas. In quocumque enim die comederis ex eo, morte morieris. Sensus est: Sicut per unius primi hominis inobedientiam, id est, transgressinnera, multi, id est, omnes ex eo geniti, constituti sunt peccatores, utpote ex illa transgressione infecti peccatn, a quo vere peccatores dicantur et sint; ita et per unius Christi obedientiam, qua obedivit Patri usque ad mortem crucis, justificabuntur multi, nimirum quotquot per fidem ex eo renascentur. Rursum hic locus manifestus est pro peccato originali. Tum ex eo ostenditur contra sectarios, justitiam nostram esse internam, sicut peccatum nostrum internum est et inhaerens. Si enim vere et proprie peccatores constituuntur per praevaricati<.nem Adae, quod tatentur adversarii, non autem vere et proprie justi constituimur, per obedientiam Christi, sed iraputative tantum, ut iidem volunt, neque consistet haec comparatio, quam facit Apostolus, et multo minus Christi justitia nobis contulerit, quam ab- Htulit injustitia Adae. Nam in illo veram et inhaerentem amisimus justitiam, in Christo recupei'amus imputativam, id est, falsam. Loquitur enim Apostolus de justitia, quam nunc per fidem accipimus^ non de ea justitiae perfectione, quam speramus in vita futura.
5:20
20. Lex autem subintravit, ut abundaret delictum. Ne perlegem existimetur aboleri potuisse peccatumintroductumper Adam, ostendit legem adeo non vahiisse ad tollendum peccatum, et justificandos homines, ut, ea superveniente, facti fuerint etiam deteriores. Quod ipsum tamen profecerit ad majorem gratiae Christi commendationem. Subititravit Graece, T^cnpzirrj/ScV. Quod alii vertunt, obiter intravit, subiit. Alibi in malam partem hoc verbum accipitur, ut Galat. 2. {iui subintroierunt explorare libertatem nostram. Verum liic non aliud significatur, quam post ingressum peccati in mundum, interim dura gratia, peccati sanatrix, exspectatur, legem subingressara fuisse. Particula ut a plerisque sic exponitur, ut non finalem causam denotet, sed eventum; quomodo frequenter alibi sumitur. Ita sensus est: Lex, prohibens peccatum, medio tempore inter Adam et Christum subingressa est. Unde tamen non aliud consecutum, quam ut peccatum magis etiam abundat-et; tum quia lex hominem constituit praevaricatoi'em, nam ubi non est lex, nec p7'aevaricatio, ut dictum est superiori capite; tum quia virtus peccati lex 1 Cor. 15. Nam occasione legis, ubi non adest gratia, magis inardescit concupiscentia. Quam utramque rationem adfert Augustinus propos. 30. Alii tamen causam finalem significari putant, sed hoc sensu: quia lex subintravit, atque adeo data est a Deo, ad permittendam abundantiam peccatorum; ut, dum legis occasione, sicuti dictum est, augetur peccatum, praesertim in opere externo et manitesto, superbus animus agnoscere cogatur se peccatorem, et legem sibi nequaquam sufficere ad justitiam. Juxta quem sensum, nobis certe probabiliorem (quem etiam S. Thomas probat et bene declarat), convenit haec sententia cum illa Galat. 3.: Lex propter transgressiones posita est, donec veniret semen etc., secundum ejus intellectum potiorem, quem videbis eo loco pluribus a nobis explicatum.
Ubi autem abundavit delictum, superabundavit gratia. Delictum, Graece peccatum. Superabundavit autem gratia, non in omnibus, sed in electis. Non enim dicit ubicumque, sed ubi indefinite, ut annotat Hugo. Nam quod ad reprobos attinet, in iis lex alium efi"ectum sive eventum non habet, quam abundantiam peccati. Quibusdam placet ubi positum esse pro adverbio temporis, id est postquam. Quod probarem, si liqueret Graecum ou aliquando sumi in ea significatione, perinde ut Latinum ubi. Sensus: Ubi peccata occasione iegis inundarunt, et homines convicti sunt suarum transgressionum, ibi redundavit gratia, id est, benignitas et misericordia Dei peccata remittens, et dona gratificantia tribuens. Nam quanto major iniquitas peccantis, tanto major gratia remittentis, et quanto majorem peccatorem quis fuisse se agnoscit, tanto majorem gratiam sibi confitetur impensam; quemadmodum docemur exemplo peccatricis evangelicae Luc. 7., et ipsius Apostoli Pauli 1 Timoth. 1. Dicitur autem de peccato, abundavit, de gratia vero superabundavit, quia gratia peccatis etiam multum abundantibus praevaluit ac potentior fait. 2L LJt, sicut regnavit peccatum in mortem, ita et gratia regnet per justitiam in vitam aeternam, per Jesum Christum dominum nostrum. In mortem, Graece et Syriace in morte, quod et in quibusdam est Latinis. Ulud quoque, Dominum nostrum, plerique Graeci codices non addunt, tametsi Syrus additum habet. Sensus est: Ut, sicut regnavit, id est, longe lateque dominium suum exercuit peccatum in morte sive per mortem, videlicet pcrtrahens homines ad mortem, ita etiam gratia et misericordia Dei late dominetur, adducens justitiam, et per eam perducens homines ad vifam aeternam, idque per meritum redemptoris ac Domini nostri Jesu Christi. Mortem intelligit eandem, quam iu superioribus, nempe mortem corporis. Unde non dicit, nos per Christum eximi a morte, scilicet ut eam non patiamur, sed per Christum nobis vitam conferri, qua nimirum mors illa destruatur per resuri-ectiouem. Quod non est futurum in reprobis, ut quibus resurrectio non erit ad vitam, 2 Mach. 7., sed mortis in aeternum continuatio. Neque enim existimamus, impiorum resuri'ectionem ad Christi beneficia })ertinere, sed referendam ad consequentiam justi judicii Dei, quod exigit, ut non solinu auimac, sed ipsi homines, qui peccaverunt, iu suis etiam c«>rporibus supplicium recipiant damnatiuuis aeternae; non quod naturalis erat futura resurrectio (nam nec animarum infusio naturabs est, nec tamen per Christum), sed quia hominis peccantis ad Deum per justam poenam ordinatio fieri non poterat, nisi existeret homo, qui poenam subiret. Huic autem doctrinae quomodo contrarium non sit, quod Apostolus dicit 1 Cor. 15.: Per hominem mors, et per hominem resurrectio mortuorum etc, videbis in ejus loci commentano. Postremo, notanda prosopopoeia quaedam in eo, quod peccatum et gratiam regnare dicit, quemadmodum et in superioribus mortem; mortem quidem, Graece {^avarov, ut regem; peccatum vero et gratiam, Graece ajiapTtav xai ydpv^, ut reginas. Qua figura rursus utitur sequenti capite, in peccato et justitia. Facit enim ad splendorem et vehementiam orationis.
5:2
2. per quem et habemus (melius : habuimus icyfxagusv) accessum per fidem in gratiam istam, in qua stamus. Ad initium quippe iustificationis respicit, ut per eundem, per quem initium sit, etiam dona connexa obtineri insinuet. Particula e£ (xa) igitur, quam antiquiores Latini multi haud recte praetermiserunt (cfr Prim. Sed. Ilaym. Abael. Lomb. Thom. etc.), correctores romani vero restituerunt, argumentativam vim habet atque haud dubitari posse innuit, quin iustificati pacem cum Deo per eundem habeant, per quem ipsam iustificationem obtinuerint. Eodem quidem temporis momento, quo iustificatur, homo ex inimicitiae divinae statu in statum pacis amicitiaeque cum Deo transfertur; logice tamen amicitia infusionem gratiae sanctificantis, qua peccata remittuntur, consequitur. Hinc videtur esse, cur Apostolus temp. perfecto usus dicat : habuimus (izy5xausv) accessum in gratiam istam in qua stamus, 1. e. ad iuslificationis gratiam, quam nunc possidemus et in qua perseveramus, accedere potuimus et accessimus, idque , uti iterum iuxta doctrinam suam antea expositam addit, per fidem. Ad quae ultima verba apposite adnotat Est. : « Etsi fides sit initium et pars quaedam iustificationis, recte tamen et convenienter dicimur per fidem habere accessum et ingressum ad gratiam iustificationis, quemadmodum per ostium ingredi dicimur domum, quamvis ipsum ostium pars domus sit. Sensus enim est, fide velut initio iustificationis eo nos ulterius adduci , ut ceteris donis accedentibus simpliciter iusti simus ac Deo accepti ad vitam aeternam; quemadmodum intrando per ostium eo quis promovetur, ut sit intra domum ». Recte autem CArys. gratiam, ad quam per fidem accessum habuimus, illam esse docet, « qua dignamur cognitione Dei, ab errore liberati veritatem cognoscimus, omnia demum bona assequimur, quae per baptismum nobis obtigerunt ». ; Substantivum zpoox[vryj à nonnullis sensu transitivo (i. q. actus adducendi, adductio) sumitur : « Per Christum habuimus, quod Deus nos adduxit » (cfr Chrys. Oec. etc.); multo tamen concinnior est oratio, si eodem modo, quo in reliquis duobus N. T. locis, ín quibus occurrit (Eph. 2,18; 3,12), intransitive sumitur (1. q. accessus, aditus). Per se patet, verba in gratiam istam haud recte a nonnullis cum expressione per fidem connecti; nusquam enim in 8. Scriptura in gratiam credere (xtavsótitv ti, tij 7ápw) aliquis dicitur aut de fide in. gratiam (fj xlaci, ek; cà» xdpw) sermo est, quamvis locutiones istae per se haud sint íneptae ac rectam explicationem admittant. Neque illorum interpretatio nobis probatur, qui sententiam relativam ín qua stamus ad dictionem per fidem referunt (cfr A'** etc.); verborum enim ordo obstat, neque ulla adest ratio, quae insolentiorem ordinem hic praeferendum esse suadeat. Post hanc brevem confirmationem, quam quasi parenthelice insertam esse diximus, S. Paulus primum iustificationis fructum describere pergit : pacem habemus ad Deum... et gloriamur in (iz) spe gloriae (filiorum) Dei;
5:3
3. non solum autem, sed et gloriamur in (&v) tribulationibus, scientes etc. Antiquiores ac iuniores interpretes multi hanc sententiam cum relativa proxime praecedente coniungunt (in qua stamus et gloriamur), atque pauci moderni eam ad alteram relativam remotiorem trahunt (per quem accessum habuimus... et gloriamur). Licet autem his constructionibus aptum sensum gigni non negemus, cum Cai. tamen ac plerisque modernis (cfr Mai. Beel. Sch. etc.) primariam sententiam his verbis continuari censemus, ita ut primus fructus uberius describatur. A praecipuo enim argumento suo aberrasse Apostolus esset dicendus, si omnia quae usque ad v. 5, quin etiam usque ad v. 11, sequuntur, ad unam ex secundariis sententiis relativis pertinerent. Itaque iuxta nostra constructionem, quae concinnitate sese commendat!, novo membro addito quantum sit pacis nostrae cum Deo restitutae pretium explicat. Eo ipso enim, quod a Deo in gratiam amicitiamque iterum sumus admissi, etiam futurae gloriae spem, quam in Adamo amiseramus, recuperavimus, ita ut iustificati, quum ab ira divina simus liberati, non amplius aeternae poenae terroribus anxiemur, sed de recuperata spe gloriae gloriemur. Verbum xavyàcOax (gloriari) ab Alexandrinis plerumque quidem pro hebr. 55nnn, interdum autem pro 205 (cfr Ps. 31,11) aut sov (Ps. 159,5) usurpatur, ut iubilum exsultationemque connotet, atque hoc sensu hic recte sumitur. Construitur autem ad indicandum obiectum, de quo aliquis laetabundus gloriatar, aut cum praep. izí (cfr Ps. 48,6; Prov. 25,15 etc.) aut cum praep. &v (Ps. 149,11 etc.), atque utramque constructionem Paulus, qui plerumquealteram praefert (v. 11; 2,93; 1 Cor. 3,21 etc.), hic coniungit (xao us0x &x' EAzOL, xavgoqsÜx £v 0Xi5eow), quia praepositiones variare amat. G/oria, de cuius spe iustificati gloriantur, simili modo, quo 3,23, iuxta veriorem lectionem (cfr VV. LL.) vocatur gloria Dei non tantum, uti supra (ad 3,93) diximus, quia a Deo nobis est parata, sed etiam quia participatio quaedam ipsius gloriae divinae est. Quae gloria, quum omnibus filiis adoptivis Dei sit parata, etiam g/oria filiorum Dei appellatur (8,21), unde hodierna latina lectio re & graeca non differt. Neque tamen hic subsistit Paulus, sed ut pacis cum Deo pretium magis augeat exornetque, iustificatos non solum de spe futurae gloriae exsultare ac gloriari, sed etiam gloriari in tribulationibus praesentibus addit. Elliptica locutio z2 42»z» 2£, ad quam praecedens sententia , uti patet, supplenda est, haud admodum est rara (v. 11; 8,93; 9,10; 2 Cor. 8,19; cfr 1 Tim. 5,13) atque clare indicat novum obiectum adiungi, de quo gloriandum sit. A vero ergo aberrant, qui aut in priore membro verbis iz' £z: rationem, cur gloriandum sit (To/. Est. etc.), aut iu secundo membro verbis &v zztz 04:5sotv tempus, quando gloriandum sit (4g. — Volk. Beck. etc.), declarariarbitrantur. Pax cum Deo animos iustificatorum tanta fiducia replet, ut non tantum de spe futurae gloriae sed de illis ipsis tribulationibus praesentibus, quibus spes illa exstingui ac destrui videtur, laetabundi glorientur. Tantum enim abest, ut tribulationes spem exstinguant, ut iustificati optime sciant, illas spem augere, id quod sorita quodam ! Paulus exponit ac demonstrat : scientes, quod tribulatio patientiam operatur,
5:4
&. patientia autem probationem, probatio vero spem. De tribulatonibus loquitur, quas iustificati « aut propter Christum, aut propter iustitiam ipsam sive & persecutoribus, sive a daemonibus, sive boni exsequendi causa a carne ipsa patiuntur » (To/.). lam vero tribulatio patientiam (ozcyzví» constantiam) operari (xaxepyátec0a.) dieitur, « non sic quidem, quod tribulatio sit eius causa effectiva, sed quia tribulatio est materia et occasio exercendae patientiae » (TAom. cfr Cai. Tol. Est. Iust. etc.), vel potius constantiae. Nomine quippe izcyovzc hic , uti plerumque, virtus illa intelligitur, qua homo calamitatibus vexationibusque, quibus premitur, non fractus in fide pictateque fortis constansque perseverat (üzsu£vex cfr ad 2,7). Absolute tamen Apostolus tribulationem constantiam operari asserit, quia lectores suos gratia adiutos occasione sibi oblata certe usuros esse confidit. Porro patientia probationem ($ovwdv) : operatur, i. e. constantia, qua tribulationes propter Deum perferimus, efficit, ut probati simus ac probata spectataque indoles nostra innotescat. Sicut aurum enim aut argentum igne examinatum probum esse cognoscitur ac velut purum approbatur, ita homo Deo acceptus in camino humiliationis exploratus probatur i. e. genuinus Dei servus esse cognoscitur (cfr Eccli. 2,5). Bene Thom. : « si quis, inquit, in rebus corporalibus et temporalibus patienter (ac fortiter) sustinet propter bona cousequenda aeterna, sufficienter ex hoc probatur, quod talis plus amat bona aeterna quam temporalia ». cet Deus quasi explorat fidem nostram, utrum genuina sit necne, atque hac ratione efficit, ut constantes nos exhibeamus. Iacobi igitur sententia praecedenti sententiae Pauli (tribulatio patientiam operatur), nostrae vero sententiae altera Iacobi respondet : patientia opus perfectum habet. Ytaque duo Apostoli, quamvis verbis dissonare videantur, re consonant (cfr V. Beda in Jac. 4,3.4; T'hom. Tol. lust. etc.). Demum probatio spem operatur, quandoquidem efficit, ut spes, quae iam adest, non tantum vigeat roboreturque (Chrys. etc.), verum etiam crescat et augeatur. Qui enim tribulationibus fortiter constanterque superatis probatus est ac proinde experientia didicit, se nullis calamitatibus, etiamsi varie tentatus sit, a iustitia ac fidei virtute esse dimotum, is mirum in modum animo erigitur in spem gloriae. Nam una ex parte Deus homini, quem probavit et invenit dignum se (Sap. 3,5), augmentum spei largitur, altera autem ex parte talis homo iure merito firmius confidit promissioni Domini, copiosam fore in coelis mercedem eorum, quibus hostes nominis ipsius maledixerint quosque persecuti sint! (Matth. 5,11. 12). Ratione explicata, cur de tribulationibus gloriemur, Apostolus argumentatione sua ad primariam suam assertionem (iustzficatos de spe gloriae Dei gloriari) reductus, eidem nunc inhaerens eos de illa iuremerito gloriari ostendit :
5:5
5. spes autem (1; 8 £t; spes de qua agitur, non tantum probatorum, sed omnium iustificatorum) non confundit, quia caritas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris per Spiritum S., qui datus est nobis. Nexum cum praecedentibus bene exponit To/. : « Ne quis diceret, parum esse quod non re sed spe detur, Paulus hoc reiicit; non est. inquit, spes nostra, qualis humana, quae hominibus nititur; haec saepe fallax est et confundit saepe, dum homines iis, quae sperabant, defraudantur ac se vane sperasse seroque veritatem cognovisse erubescunt. At nostra spes talis non est; nunquam enim confundit neque qui sperarunt sese speratis bonis unquam defraudatos sentient neque unquam decepti crubescent ». Per metonymiam (effectus pro causa) spes divina non confundere dicitur, quatenus non fallit neque efficit, ut sperans aut de vanitate spei suae aut de deceptione, quam passus est, erubescat; vel iuxta Tom. « spes haec, qua speramus gloriam filiorum Dci. non confundit quia non deficit, nisi homo ei deficiat; ille enim dicitur a spe sua confundi, qui deficit ab eo quod sperat ». Porro iustificatos spe sua velut inani non frustratum iri, B. Paulus efficaci argumento probat ex caritate Dei desumto, quippe a qua gloriae speratae obtentio dependeat quamque sibi dona futura non esse negaturam ex donis iam acceptis iure colligant. « Futuris, inquit Chrys., fidem facit per ea quae iam data sunt. Absit enim ne quis dicat : Quid si Deus bona nobis largiri nolit? Quod enim ea largiri possit, scimus utique omnes; unde vero scimus, quod etiam velit? Ex iis quae iam facta sunt. Ex quibusnam factis? Ex amore nobis iam exhibito. Quid igitur fecit? Spiritum S. dedit; ideo quum dixisset : spes non confundit, Paulus huius rei demonstrationem addidit dicens : quia caritas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris. Non dicit : data est, sed : diffusa est [vel potius : effusa est ixx£yovai] ubertatem doni significans. Quod enim maximum erat donum, hoc dedit; non coelum terramque et mare, sed quod his omnibus pretiosius est quodque ex hominibus angelos, filios Dei ac fratres Christi facit. Quid hoc est? Spiritus S. qui datus est nobis. Nisi enim nos post labores summis exornare vellet coronis, nobis ante labores tanta dona non dedisset. Nunc igitur amoris sui magnitudinem nobis demonstravit, quum non sensim ac pedetentim nos honoraret, sed ipsum fontem bonorum nobis daret idque ante certamina ». Recte quidem Tol. adnotat, vim argumenti paulini in eo non esse, quod Deus nos diligat (nam quum inimici essemus, etiam nos dilexit dilectionemque misso Filio suo demonstravit), sed in eo, quod Deus amorem suum erga nos iam ostenderit Spiritu S. dato, quo reconciliati et amici Dei facti simus; errat autem, si CArys. verba alio sensu esse interpretatum censet, id quod allegatum locum legenti facile patet. Ad accurationem sententiae intelligentiam quod attinet, in controversia est, utrum caritas Dei intelligenda sit illa, qua Deus nos diligit. an illa, qua nos Deum diligimus; utramque quippe significationem locutio admittit, quia genetivus De; aut subiectivus aut obiectivus esse potest; utraque per se apta quoque cst, quia et caritas Dei erga nos ac nostra erga Deum per Spiritum S. in cordibus nostris effundi recte dicitur. Priore solo sensu locutionem interpretantur ex Graecis CArys. Theoph., ex Latinis A'*" Pel. Cai. Tolet. Iust. ac moderni plerique (Mai. Reith. Beel. Bisp. LR. ScA.); altero solo sensu ex Graecis TAeod. PAot., ex Latinis S. Aug. (cfr de spiv. et lit. 32,56 : « Caritas Dei dicta est diffundi in cordibus nostris, non qua nos ipse diligit, sed qua nos facit dilectores suos, sicut iustitia Dei, qua nos iusti efficimur, et Domini salus, qua nos salvos facit, et fides Christi, qua nos fideles facit »), quem sequuntur ex antiquioribus multi (Herv. Aóael. Dion. Salm. Bellarm. Controv. de reparat. grat. I. 8 etc.) et ex modernis 49g. ; utroque demum sensu locutionem hic aeque probabiliter posse intelligi aut etiam utrumque sensum hic esse coniungendum censent ex Graecis Orig. Oec. Euth., ex Latinis Prim. Sed. Haym. Gl ord. Lomb. Thom. Perer. Est. Lap. Nat. Pic., quibus ex modernis accedunt M Ev. Dr. Priorem tamen sensum (caritatem Dei erga nos) omnino esse retinendum, contextus docet, ad quem S. Aug., cuius magna auctoritate reliqui Latini seducti videntur, forsitan non satis attenderit. Namque dubium non est, quin Paulus in sequentibus ex caritate, qua Deus nos amplecütur, argumentetur, nulla vero est ratio, cur eum v. 5. eandem locutionem, quam v. 8. in eodem contextu de divina erga nos dilectione adhibet, de nostro erga Deum amore intellexisse dicamus. Immerito dein obiicitur, quod Conc. trid. verba Pauli de caritate erg Deum nobis infusa nobisque inhaerente explicaverit; neque enim Patres tridentini paulinum locum allegant vel interpretantur, sed verbis tantum paulinis ita utuntur, ut illa argumento suo, cui exprimendo per se quam maxime sunt idonea, quodammodo accommodent !. Itaque Deus amorem suum erga illos, qui iustificantur, Spiritu S. dato maxime manifestat, qui illis et sigillum divinae adoptionis sit (cfr ad 8,15 et ad Gal. &,6) et arrha divinae hereditatis (EpA. 1,1& cfr Comment. in 2 Cor. 1,92 p. 48 sq.); atque hoc sensu caritas Dei in cordibus nostris effusa dicitur per Spiritum S., qui datus est nobis. Iamvero eis, quos Deus Spiritu S. dato amicos, immo filios suos esse declaravit quibusque eodem Spiritu S. dato arrham futurae gloriae hereditatisque iam concessit, promissam hereditatem negare non potest. Itaque iustificatorum spem fallacem, quae cos confundat, non esse, sed firmam certamque, ex hac argumentatione rite colligitur. Eandem autem plerique interpretes sequentibus rr. 6-11 ita continuari arbitrantur, ut Apostolus, postquam firmitatem spei iustificatorum ex amore probavit. quem Deus Spiritu S. dato eis exhibuit, nunc altero argumento eandem firmitatem ex amore Dei pro eis, quum adhuc peccatores essent, Filium suum morti tradentis confirmet (cfr Chrys. Theod. ctc., Herr. Thom, etc., Tol. Iust. etc., Beel. Mai. etc.). Quae sententia nobis non probatur; rectius enim eum ad primariam suam assertionem, iustificatos pacem cum Deo habere et de spe futurae hereditatis gloriari (1. 2), iam reverti illiusque probationem addere dicemus. Sine probatione enim illam relinquere non potuit, argumentatione autem , quae sequitur, eum non tam spei firmitatem quam primarium suum assertum ante oculos habuisse, ex vv. 9. 10 evidenter elucet, A summo igitur amoris documento, quod Deus mundo exhibuit, quando unigenitum suum Filium pro impiis mori voluit, initium sumit (6-8), ut hoc fundamento nixus concludat, illos qui iam iustificati sunt multo magis et de sua pacc cum Deo et de sua hereditatis spe gloriari posse (9-11). Iuxta Vulg. Apostolus ab interrogatione rhetorica exorditur, qua divinam caritatem in Christi morte manifestatam admiratur ac celebrat :
5:6
6. ut quid enim (d «i yáp ad quid enim, cur enim) Christus, quum adhuc infirmi (&s0:vet;) essemus, secundum tempus (xazk xawphv 1. q. opportuno tempore) pro impiis (0539 &s:60v in gratiam impiorum) mortuus est? Huic enim interrogationi nihil responderi posse supponit, nisi id factum esse ad divinae caritatis magnitudinem commendandam (cfr v. 8). Quae amoris excellentia ut clarius perspiciatur, duo mortis Christi momenta in hoc v. exponit : tempus quo Christus mortuus est (guum adhuc infirmi essemus), et causam , propter quam mortem subiit (pro impiis), quibus velut tertium momentum gravitatem facti ipsius in t. sequente addit (vir enim pro iusto quis moritur ctc.). Nominibus znfirmorum et impiorum non tantum easdem personas sed ctiam eadem ratione designari multi putant, quia infirmi a Paulo illi dicantur, qui morbo impietatis vel peccati laborent (cfr TAeod. : ei «sf guiitpesvot 3 ^l &ozfsiag v5acy, Pel. : peccatorum ac scelerum languoribus pressi, ZAom. : infirmi infirmitate peccati, Es£. - variis peccatorum languoribus detenti, etc.). Quae haud recte dicuntur ; nam infirmos Paulus hic potius homines ante Evangelium annuntiatum degentes vocat, utpotequi non tantum viribus propriis, quibus ad salutem pervenirent, fuerint destituti, sed etiam non habuerint, a quo roborarentur et adiuvarentur. Quae infirmitas ipsa quidem peccatum non crat, in peccato autem suam radicem habebat atque etiam, ut ex iis quae antea disputavit luculenter constat, homines ad peccata adducebat, immo vero eflecerat, ut omnes, ludaei ac Graeci, sub peccato essent (3,9 etc.). Eo igitur tempore, quo homines experientia de sua infirmitate edocti de salute obtinenda quasi desperabant (guum infirmi essemus), ergo revera opportuno tempore (secundum tempus), Christus ad eos salvandos mortuus est. Expressione secundum tempus (xxzx xaxpiv) scilicet priora verba (quum adAuc infirmi essemus) accuratius definiuntur, id quod iam S. Hier. (ad Algas. cp. 121,7) sua interpretatione (opportuno tempore) recte insinuavit. Quod vero alii cum Graecis expressione xavà xaip?v tempus morti Christi a Patre praedefinitum (1. q. tempore statuto) significari censent (Tol. Est. etc., Mai. Beel. Reith ctc.), id minus aptum est, quia appositio plane otiosa esset, siquidem caritas Deierga nosin eo non apparuit, quod Christus tempore divinitus praedefinito, sed tempore nobis opportuno mortem subiit. Multo minus utique cum antiquioribus Latinis dicere licet, locutionem secundum tempus significare « ad tempus breve » (quia tertia die Christus erat surrecturus) vel « ultima mundi aetate » etc. (cfr A'*" Prim. Sed. etc. Gl ord. Thom. etc.); neque enim verbis nec sententiae hae explicationes congruunt. Itaque iuxta Apostolum magnitudo caritatis divinae primum ex eo cognoscitur, quod Christus opportuno tempore, quando genus humanum omnimodam suam infirmitatem jam cognoverat, pro eo mortuus sit; apertius autem ex eo cognoscitur, quod pro impiis, i. e. in eorum gratiam et utilitatem, qui utpote impii (x2:£::;) inimici Dei erant, mortem subierit. Quod caritatis testimonium , ut quam singulare ac vere unicum sit, evidentius appareat, Paulus gravitatem facti quasi a contrario ex iis, quae inter homines fiunt, illustrat. Revera incredibilis est bonitas et inaudita clementia Christi pro impiis sanguinem suum fundentis,
5:7
7. viz enim pro iusto quis moritur, nam pro bono forsitan quis audeat mori. Id utique fieri posse concedit, ut aliquis pro bono iustoque viro servando suam ipsius vitam profundat, licet id « metu mortis cuncta terrente » (S. Hier. l. c.) adeo rarum sit, ut longo saeculorum cursu vix unquam contigerit. Id autem concedens satis clare simul insinuat, plane inauditum esse neque verisimile videri, ut quis ad impium a debita mortis poena servandum se ipsum morti tradat. Unde sua sponte illucescit, quam insignis ae singularis fuerit mors Christi sanguinem suum fundentis, ut eis salutem praestaret, quos impios Deique inimicos cssc sciebat. Disputant interpretes, utrum in v. 7. de persona, an de re iusta ac bona agatur, ac similiter utrum nomina /ust (2aizo) ac bond. (xx023) eadem significatione adhibeantur, an potius nomine ^on altior gradus iusti significetur, ut bonus sit is qui plus dat, quam iurc dare tenetur (cfr Matth. 20,15) vel etiam is qui ad beneficia praestanda cst propensus (a7a02; l. q. 7257-2; beneficus). Ad priorem quaestionem quod attinet, de personis agi cum Graecis ( CArys. Theod. ctc.) plurimi recte tenent (dissentientibus S. Hier. l. c. aliisque); id enim oppositio horum nominum ad impos versus praecedentis et ad percatores versus sequentis docet. In altera autem contra Pel. paucosque alios cum Graecis ac S. Hier. censemus, iustum ac bonum hic non esse diversae si- gnificationis, quia duo adiectiva saepe eodem sensu usurpantur neque huius loci contextus diversam eorum significationem postulat. Quod interrogatione sua (v. 6) insinuaverat et comparatione (c. 7) probaverat, divinam caritatem plane singularem in Christo pro impiis moriente esse manifestatam, id Apostolus nunc clarioribus verbis repetit, ut concludat, ob eximiam hanc Dei caritatem iustificatos multo maiore cum iure de sua pace cum Deo confidere posse :
5:8
8. commendat autem caritatem suam. Deus in. nobis (si; $yx; erga nos), quoniam quum adhuc. peccatores essemus (secundum tempus) Christus pro nobis mortuus esty
5:9
9. multo igttur magis nunc , tustificati in sanguine ipsius , salet erimus ab ira per. ipsum. Praecipuum sententiae prioris pondus inest verbo covíszr2v , quippe a quo magna cum vi inchoetur, alquesimul pronomini £xu:23 (23,9 £x2729. Gn; suam ipsius caritatem), quippe quo caritas Deo propria velut prorsus singularis ac sui quasi generis ab humana caritate distinguatur. Graecum porro zuviszrew hoc in loco latine rectius redditur demonstrat (cfr 2 Cor. 7,11; Gal. 2,18) quam commendat, quamquam altera haec versio immeritissimo a nonnullis acath. (Fritzsche etc.) dicitur inepta. Sensus igitur huius sententiae, quae adversaliva coniunctione 24 (autem) immediate praecedenti, in qua de summo sed rarissimo gradu amoris humani est sermo, opponitur, hic est : Suam ipsius caritatem , quae ad solos iustos bonosque, sicut humanus amor, nequaquam restringitur, Deus nobis (sig $px; erga nos) demonstravit argumento semper manifesto , quod vim suam nunquam amittit (hinc praes. covíozsw demonstrat), nimirum eo quod (2. elliptice pro &v -23z« 20) illo tempore , quo adhuc peccatores eramus, i. e. « non solum peccavimus, sed peccatis peccata addidimus et in statu peccati eramus » (Tol.) ideoque nihil nisi poenam exspectare potuimus, CAristus pro nobts (üzip jov in nostram utilitatem, ut nos a iusta poena liberaret) mortuus est. Quam divinam caritatem, tam praeclaro argumento olim testatam demonstratamque atque etiam hodie manifestam, hoc tempore, quo iam fructum mortis Christi percepimus, multo minus nobis licet in dubium vocare. Tcnendum potius est, nos multo magts nunc, postquam ex statu peccati egressi per Christum accessum habuimus ad iustificationis gratiam, in qua stamus (cfr ad v. 2), utpote tuscitficatos in sanguine (per sanguinem) ipsius, salvos fore ab ira divina, « quae nihil est aliud quam iusta Dei vindicta » (S. Aug. de Trin. XIII. 16,91 cfr ad 1,18), per ipsum, nos ergo pacem habere ad Deum per Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum (cfr ad v. 1). « Numquid is, inquit CArys., qui inimicis suis ita pepercit, ut Filio suo non parceret, nunc iustificatis non patrocinabitur »? Multis quidem eximiisque beneficiis aliis Deus caritatem, qua homines 8b aeterno amplectitur, demonstravit ac praesertim incarnatione rebusque gestis omnibus Filiisui; mortem tamen Christi solam Apostolus commemorat, quia maius caritatis documentum excogitari nequit, quam quod Pater innocentissimum suum Filium pro vilibus creaturis iisque peccatoribus sanguinem fundere voluerit. Mortem autem Christi B. Paulus hoc in loco (et 8,32 cfr Joan. 3.16; 1 Joan. 5.9. 10) infinitae Patris caritati attribuit, uti alibi Christi ipsius caritati (Ga/. 2,20 ; cfr Apoc. 1,5); utrumque rectissime. Sicut enim Pater inter varios modos, quibus mundum peccato obnoxium redimere potuit, incarnationem cruentamque mortem Unigeniti eligens firmissimo arzumcnto, quod refelli aut addubitari nulla ratione potest, immensam suam caritatem demonstravit, ita Christus non minus firmo argumento candem caritatem manifestavit, quando propter nos nostramque salutem decreto Patris liberrime sese subiiciens semet ipsum humiliavit factus obediens usque ad mortem (PA. 2,7) ac proposito sibi gaudio sustinuit crucem confusione contemta (Hebr. 12,9). Id insinuat Paulus, ubi Patrem in Christo mundum sibi reconciliasse dicit (2 Cor. 5,19), atque hoc sensu recte S. Aug. (de Trin. XIII. 11,15) « omnia, inquit, simul et Pater et Filius et amborum Spiritus pariter et concorditer operantur; tamen iustificati sumus in Christi sanguine et reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem Filii eius ». Ab hac argumentatione, qua iustificatos ostendit per mortem Christi ab ira divina salvos esse ac pacem cum Deo habere, Paulus ulterius progrediens simili argumento iustificatos de salutis futurae spe iure confidere ac gloriari (cfr v. 2) docet :
5:10
10. si enim quum £nimici essemus, reconciliati sumus Deo per mortem Filii eius, multo magis reconciliati, salvi erimus in vita ipsius. Recte Chrys. iam monet, verba v. 10. nudam repetitionem praecedentis sententiae non esse; in priore utique membro Paulus praecedentem conclusionem ita repetit, ut eam simul explicet clarioremque reddat, in altero autem novam conclusionem addit. Priorem vero clariorem reddit nomini peccatorum substituens nomen inimicorum ac praedicato salvos fore ab ira substituens reconciliari cum Deo. Qua permutatione clare ostendit, se in praecedente conclusione priorem partem primariae suae assertionis (iustificatos pacem cum Deo habere v. 1) demonstrare voluisse; reconciliatione quippe pax est restituta cum Deo et iustificati ex statu inimicorum Dei in statum amicorum Dei sunt translati. Quia autem iustificati iam sunt amici Dei, ideo etiam multo magis de divina caritate, quam in statu inimicorum iam experti sunt, confidere sibique salutem speratam promittere possunt. Eodem quidem verbo (co05524:0x salvi erimus) salus in utraque conclusione exprimitur, at non eodem plane sensu. Namque additis verbis àz* zz: 227; (a6 ira) in priore (v. 9) ad negativam suam partem, sc. ad libertatem a poena peccatis debita, restringitur; in altera (r. 10) vero, quum omnis restrictio desit, pleno suo sensu ac praesertim positivo intelligatur oportet de gloria (filiorum) Dei, qua iustificati in coelo fruentur et in cuius spe jam nunc gloriantur (tv. 2. 10). Quod clare ex nova quoque oppositione apparet, quam Aposto-- lus huic argumento inserit. Morli quippe, qua pro impiis suscepta Christus peccatoribus Deique inimicis iustificationem ac reconciliationem promeruit, gloriosa vita opponitur, cuius Christus a mortuis resuscitatus iustificatos reddet participes. Qui enim, quum peccatores et inimici essent, per morientem Christum (v. 9. zn sanguine tpsius, v. 10. per mortem. Filii. eius) iustificati Deoque reconciliati sunt, ii multo magis nunc, quum jam amici Dei sint, per Christum gloriose viventem et regnantem (n vita ipsius) gloriam filiorum Dei, quam sperant, obtinebunt!. » Mors eius, inquit Orig., mortem inimicitiae illi dedit, quae erat inter nos et Deum, et reconciliationis initium; resurrectio autem et vita ipsius confert salutem credentibus » (cfr ad 4,25), vel uti Herv. (cfr CArys. etc.) habet : « Si mors ipsius tantum potuit, ut illud faceret quod difficilius erat, tunc vita, i. e. resurrectio et gloria eius, illud facere poterit , ubi minor difficultas est ». Attamen Paulus supra (v. 2) non tam dixerat, iustificatos gloriam (filiorum) Dei adepturos esse, quam eos iam nunc in gloriae illius spe, utpote firma et certa, gloriari asseruerat. Quapropter argumentatione sua nondum contentus eam nova gradatione complet :
5:11
11. non solum autem, sed et gloriamur (vel iuxta plerosque codd. graec. : g/oriautes xavyóysvot cfr. VV. LL.) in Deo per Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum, per quem nunc reconciliationem accepimus. luxta plerasque versiones, uti etiam iuxta graecos PP, qui ad participium xxz4o0yevot verbum écu£v supplent (xavgopevct éaasv 1. q. xay oys0z), ad membrum ellipticum (non solum autem) praedicatum praecedentis sententiae (reconciliati salvi erimus xazavkaévtt; co0no5ps0a) trahere debemus, ut sensus sit : reconciliati non tantum gloriam filiorum Dei consequemur (futuro tempore), sed etiam gloriamur (praesente iam tempore) in Deo, sc. in eius caritate, quae tot beneficiis nos iustificatos iam cumulavit, ut futurae gloriae, quam promisit, assequendae firmam certamque spem teneamus. Ne quis vero hanc gloriationem accuset atrogantiae, fundamentum certae huius spci esse merita Christi additur, per quem ipsam reconciliationem iustificati iam sint assecuti. Illud quidem in hac explicatione difficultatem creare dicitur, quod tempus futurum a praesente non clarius sit distinctum; ad illum enim quem exposuimus sensum exprimendum scribi oportuisse : c3 yóvzv 2t GuÜrciusÜx cote, XAWX xxt vv xxvyous0x (non solum autem a/iquando salvi erimus, sed etiam nunc gloriamur). Licet autem ita scribi potuisse non plane negemus (minus apta tamen esset constructio, quia particulis temporalibus nimiam vim tribueret), temporis differentiam ipsis verborum formis (so0vciys0x et xxvyops0z) sufficienter indicatam csse censemus. Accedit quoque, quod Apostolus in sententiam relativam (per quem nunc reconciliationem accepimus), uti iam Orig. adnotavit, « non sine causa illud nunc inseruit, sed ut ostenderet gloriationem nobis non solum in futuro sed et in praesente datam esse ». (uod vero praeterea obiicitur, autoritate codicum graec. de lectione participii zz»- 4óytvet constare, a paulino autem loquendi usu abhorrere, ut participium verbo ézy£» sola mente addito pro z27/55.:0z adhibeatur, id non creat difficultatem , quia priore asserti parte data vel concessa negamus alteram. Sine ullo enim dubio etiam 2 Cor. 7,5 participium 6X«ézyevat pro verbo finito est positum, ita ut icyév mente addi necesse sit, ac nostro loco prorsus similis est usus participii in 2 Cor. 8 19 (cfr etiam supra ad 3,94). Quae quum ita sint, cum Graecis (Orig. Chrys. Theod. Theoph. Oec. Euth.) ac plurimis antiquioribus iunioribusque Latinis hanc explicationem praeferimus, quam Vwu/g. nostra sua lectione commendat, idque maxime quia universi loci contextui apprime consonat. Tribus enim primarii asserti (r. 1. 2) membris (pacem habemus ad Deum, gloriam Dei obtinebimus, in certa gloriae futurae spe gloriamur) tria argumenta, quae per gradationem quandam se excipiunt, accurate respondent, uti ex supra dictis luculenter patet. rationem cur salvi futuri simus indicat, non potest esse parallelum participium xevzousvo:, quo eiusmodi ratio nequaquam indicatur. Quare alii cum Est. solum verbum ewt25óu«0« supplent : « non solum autem salvi erimus, sed etiam gloriantes salvi erimus ». Quae constructio, licet aptior sit, contextui non congruit, in quo de futura gloriatione nostra non agitur; Apostolus autem, si hic eam addere voluisset, sine ullo dubio scripsisset : oi uóvov 8i (cwÜnsópsüa), dÀÀà xci xavyzcóuiüa. De nonnullorum modernorum acath. supplementis (ex. gr. Jlück. etc., qui ex v. 9 supplet : o) uóvov 5E 600ncóps0a dno c.c Ópyzic, dAÀAE xal xzuyGut0a xvA, aut. /leiche : od. góvov 8i xavnAldqnutv xai ow0noódpe0a, dM& xal xxi) opus non est dicere, quia neminem latet, quam parum sint apta. 2. — Sicul per Adamum condemnalio, sla per Christum salus (5,12-21). regnet per iustitiam in. citam aeternam, olAtuotv $ &uapzía àv t Oaváto, odzw; xal per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum, $ 4dpu Baauióon Ola Oatocivre tig Tuv alcviov ótk Xotszc "InooU vo9. Kupiou fuv !. Per unum Christum, qui pro hominibus, quum adhuc peccatores Deique inimici essent, sanguinem suum fudit, omnia iustitiae gloriaeque bona credentibus obvenire, Apostolus itemtidem in superiore pericope asseruerat : per Christum ad iustificationis gratiam accessum habuerunt (v. 2), per Christi sanguinem iustificati sunt (v. 9), per Christum morientem ab irae divinae terroribus liberati Deoque reconciliati pacem habent cum Deo vv. 1. 9. 10), per eundem a mortuis resuscitatum glorioseque viventem gloriae Dei participes reddentur (vv. 2. 10) ac tam certam futurae suae gloriae spem nunc tenent, ut de ea iam glorientur idque mediis in tribulationibus, quippe quibus ipsam spem augeri et crescere sciant (vv. 9. 3. 11). lamvero «tamquam causam quaesiturus, quare per unum mediatorem hominem fiat ista reconciliatio » (cfr S. Aug. c. Iulian. VI. 4,9), Paulus quasi ex alta specula totam generis humani historiam contemplatus ad initia inimicitiae, quae Deum inter et homines obtinet, regreditur atque Deum in iustitia bonisque ei annexis per unum Christum tradendis ac diffundendis eandem viam rationemque inire docet, quam genus humanum tenuerat, quando in uno Adamo peccante a creatore suo defecit seseque universum peccato eiusque sequelis obnoxium fecit. Originem enim diffusionemque salutis per Christum acquisitae cum origine ac diffusione condemnationis per Adamum invectae comparans eandem demonstrat relationem intercedere Christum inter et eos, qui fide ex eo renascuntur, relate ad iustitiam aeternamque vitain iustificatis promissam, quae inter Adamum et eius posteros intercedit relate ad peccatum mortemque, quae peccati est poena. Nova igitur sectio, in qua comparatio haec instituitur, praecedenti illustrandae confirmandaeque inservit. Si enim primi Adami inobedientia in omnes, qui ex eo progeniti naturam eius susceperunt, peccatum mortemque invexit, mirum non est, quod secundi Adami obedientia omnibus, qui fide ex eo renati naturam eius participant, iustitiam ac vitam conferat. Itaque S. Paulus, ut originem ac propagationem iustitiae vitaeque cum origine ac diffusione peccati mortisque comparet, ante omnia peccatum cum sua poena per unum hominem in totum humanum genus esse propagatum lectoribus in memoriam revocat (v. 12) ac breviter probat (vv. 13. 14). Deinde ab uno ad omnes gratiam multo facilius propagari posse ostendit quum ex ipsius gratiae natura (r. 15), tum ex potentiore eius efficacitate, quae effectu maiore sese manifestet oporteat (vv. 16. 17). Quibus quasi dilucidationis causa insertis ad comparationem v. 12. indicatam revertitur eamque claris verbis proponit et explicat (vv. 18. 19). Demum ne quis mosaica iam Lege universalitatem regni peccati mortisque sublatam esse sibi persuadeat, paucis nationis et iustitiae) paucissimi minusc. gr., aliqui PP. (Theod. S. Isid. Pelus. ep. III. 195), It. (A'er etc.) Vulg. Syr. docet, quaenam Legis hac in quaestione sint partes; Lege enim delicta &ucta esse monet, ut clarius splendesceret virtus gratiae ac iustitiae (vv. 20. 21). ' Novam sectionem praecedenti arcte pro more suo adiungens Ápostolus nexum causalem inter Adami peccatum mortemque et inter peccati mortisque in genere humano universalitatem velut rem lectoribus suis compertam affert :
5:12
129. propterea sicut per unum hominem peccatum in hunc mundum (melius : in mundum si; «5» xioycv) intravit et per peccatum mors, et ita (xai cüzwc) 1n omnes homines mors pertransiit, in quo (ig! oi. q. &xl «cózo 9 propterea. quod vel quia) omnes peccaverunt... Diligentiore explanatione haec sententia indiget, ut clarius appareat, quanto cum iure Ecclesia eam semper de peccato originali sit interpretata !. Probe enim animadvertatur oportet, hanc doctrinam hic non tam velut ignotam exponi, quam velut plane notam supponi, siquidem affertur, ut explicetur, qua ratione per unius Christi obedientiam omnes, qui a Christo regenerantur, iustitiae vitaeque participes reddantur. Primo autem in loco de connexione dicendum est, qua haec sententia prioribus adiungitur; quo enim particula àix «25:5 (propterea) referatur, in controversia est. [nter modernos acath. haud pauci eam ad totum superiorem tractatum referunt, quo inde a 1,18 Paulus omnes homines sub peccato esse neque nisi per fidem Christi salutem obtinere demonstravit. Illius enim tractatus clausulam esse hanc pericopen (8,19-21) statuunt, qua theseos antea (3,22) propositae verba in omnes et super omnes credentes exponantur ac probentur (God. cfr Thol. Rück. Holst. etc.). Verum demonstrationem 1,18 inchoatam Apostolus 4,25 iam absolvit indeque a 5,1 de fructibus iustitiae per Christum nobis acquisitae agere coepit. Universalitatem autem iustitiae, quae est per fidem, iam 3,21 sqq. et 4,9 sqq. fuse probavit, atque in hac sectione non tam de universali destinatione quam de origine salutis vel potius de uno eius mediatore Christo agit. — Alii inter modernos cath. et acath., uti antiquitus iam cum Haym. Herv. Thom. haud pauci, particulam ad solam ultimam sententiam relativam (per quem nunc reconciliationem accepimus) aut ad tres ultimas sententias (9-11) referunt. Quae opiniones eatenus quidem teneri possunt, quatenus ultimo illo membro aut tribus illis sententiis summa quaedam totius praecedentis sectionis (5,1-11) contineri non sine veri specieasseritur. Rectius tamen accuratiusque cum aliis multis (cfr Cai. Tolet. etc., Reith. Beel. Bisp. etc. — Weiss etc.) Apostolum totam superiorem pericopen (5,1-11) ante oculos habuisse dicemus; universa quippe in eo versatur (quemadmodum iam diximus), ut totam nostram salutem per unum Christum esse asserat. Nexus igitur est hic : propterea (nimirum quia per unum Christum accessum ad iustificationem iustitiamque ipsam, reconciliationem quoque pacemque cum Deo atque firmam futurae gloriae spem habemus) eadem est recuperatae salutis ratio, quae fuit amissae; sicut per unius Adami inobedientiam peccatum et mors in omnes, qui ad Adamum pertinent, transiit, ita per unius Christi obedientiam iustitia ac vita in omnes, qui ad Christum pertinent, diffunditur. Similiter S. Aug. (c. duas epp. Pel. IV. 4,8), qui eundem nexum sequi videtur : « Sicut fuit unus ad mortem propter peccatum, ita et unus ad vitam propter iustitiam ». Praecipuam revera sequentis sectionis vim in eo esse, quod unus sit auctor iustitiae ac vitae, sicut unus fuit auctor peccati et mortis, clare quum ex nostro v. 12. elucet, in quo illud per unum ominem magno cum pondere primum locum tenct, tum ex vv. 15. 17. 18. 19., in quibus illa auctorum unitas idemtidem inculcatur. Quare non plane immerito Chrys. hanc comparationem ideo institui ait, « ut quum tibi dixerit Iudaeus : Quomodo uno Christo recte operante orbis salutem est adeptus? tu ei respondere possis : Quomodo uno inobediente Adamo orbis condemnatus est? » Ad constructionem quod attinet, sententiam esse incompletam (z»avzazi1::0»), apodosi qua alterum comparationis membrum enuntietur deficiente, vix non omnes, praeeunte O74. !, iure tenent. Namque Apostolus, quum ultimo inciso (Zn quo omnes peccaverunt) vv. 13. et 15. probationem addendam esse censuisset, inchoatam comparationem non continuavit, sed alterum eius membrum in fine v. 14. alia sententiae constructionisque forma (qui est typus futuri) obiter et obscure indicavit!, ut illud postea (vv. 18. 19) accuratius clariusque exponeret. Satis facile autem ex primo membro alterum suppletur in eum fere modum, quem Orig. iam proposuit. Minus apte, licet in genere nobiscum consentiant, pauci moderni ad constructionem perficiendam in principio sententiae alterum comparationis membrum ex praecedentibus supplent (« propterea per unum Christum reconciliationem accepimus, sicut per unum hominem » elc., vel; « propterea per unum hominem est vita, sicut per unum » etc.). A vero autem plane aberrant, qui constructionem esse anacoluthicam negant et apodosin aut a verbis e! per peccatum aut a. verbis et ita in omnes inchoant. Ut enim praetermittamus, constructione ipsa, quum apodosis neque ab et (xai) neque ab et ita (xai c:wz quod non est idem ac c3zes xat) apte inchoetur, illam explicationem excludi, sensus quoque qui exoritur plane est ineptus, ne dicamus absurdus; quid enim in hoc contextu sibi vult sententia, « propterea (cur tandem?) per peccatum mortem in mundum intrasse, sicut per unum hominem peccatum in mundum intraverit », aut « propterea (cur?) mortem zn omnes pertransiisse, sicut per unum hominem peccatum et mors in mundum intraverint ». Minus procul alii aberrant, qui ad totius pericopes structuram non satis attendentes aut v. 15 aut v. 18. profasi resumtae ac repetitae apodosin adiungi arbitrantur. Etenim tv. 15 sqq. non tam similitudo quain dissimilitudo, quae inter effectus peccati Adae et obedientiae Christi intercedit, ab Apostolo exponitur, ita ut apodosis nostrae protasi non respondeat; in v. 18. autem ex proxime praecedentibus, uti parliculae apa cóv docent?, conclusio (1 Cor. 15,22) : sicut enim in Adam omnes moriuntur, ila et in Christo omnes virificabuntur. Hic autem quum dixeril : sicut per unum hominem peccatum introivit in mundum el per peccatum mors el ila ín omnes homines mors pertransiit, in quo omnes peccaverunt non retulit, uL dicerel verbi gratia : ia et per unum hominem iustitia íntroivit in mundum et per iustitiam vita et. sic in liomines omnes vila per(ransiit, in qua omnes vivificuli sunt; hoc enim videbatur propositi eloquii sensus expetere secundum ea, quae in aliis ipse pro'oquitur ». — Sed ultimum membrum (in qua omnes. vivificati sunt) contextui non satis respondel; dicendum erat : « $n. quo (i. e. quia) omnes iustifican- (ur » (vel : iuslificati sunt). 2. Parlicula oj» (igitur) salis frequenter quidem orationi, quae parenthesi interrupta est, derivatur, cuius protasis pro nuda nostrae sententiae resumtione ac repetitione profecto haberi non potest. Quibus de sententiae nexu et constructione praemissis ad eam explicandam transimus. S. Paulum, si per unum hominem peccatum in mundum intrasse dicit, unum Adamum protoparentem nostrum significare , ex tota hac pericope, quae in unius Adami inobedientia cum Christi obedientia comparanda versatur, et ex locis parallelis (1 Cor. 15,92) tam evidenter apparet, ut merito mireris, quod Pel. (et similiter A'er, ut videtur) de Eva sermonem hic esse sibi persuaserint!. Procul quidem dubio Eva tempore prius peccavit quam Adam; unde Siracida (Eccli. 295,33 [24] « a muliere initium (factum) esse peccati » (àz*5 tvvacx5 473; &apzías) recteasserit. Eva occasio quoque fuit uti peccati Adam, ita etiam pessimarum sequelarum, quas Adami peccatum habuit; undeSiracida recte addit, « nos propter illam omnes mori » (xai 8 ' aiv xxzÜvisrzus9 «iv:;, quod minus accurate Vulg. vertit : per illam; neque enim in text. graeco habetur 2(' a5«2c), simili nimirum sensu, quo Sapiens « invidia diaboli mortem in orbem terrarum (ci; «5v x5cuc») introivisse » dixit (Sap. 2,24). At Paulusnon loquitur, ut Siracida, de primo peccato actuali, quod in mundo, i. e. inter homines, commissum sit quodque alii homines sint imitati, sed de illo peccato, « quod origine unum est, et propagalione non imitatione transfusum omnibus inest unicuique proprium » (Trid. sess. V. c. 3); atqui hoc non per Evam, sed per Adamum n mundun, i. e. in totum genus humanum, intravit omnesque homines, qui naturali generatione ab Adamo descendunt, infecit sola excepta B. Virgine, quam « in primo instanti suae conceptionis fuisse singulari omnipotentis Dei gratia et privilegio, intuitu meritorum Christi Iesu, salvatoris humani generis, ab omni originalis culpae labe praeservatam immunem » fontes revelationis testantur ac Pius IX. sollemniter definivit. Nomine Auius mundi vel potius mundi (223 42252), haud pauci quidem cum Orig. « vel locum, in quo habitant homines (orbem terrarum) vel terrenam et corporalem vitam, in qua mors habet locum » (i. q. complexum rerum terrestrium humanarumque) intelligere volunt. Cum aliis tamen ipsum genus humanum intelligere malumus, quia Apostolus in tertio sententiae membro nomen mundi suo ones homines quasi rcsumit et explicat. Gravior autem est quaestio, quid peccatum (1, &uapgxiz) hic significet, ac maior in ea solvenda interpretum dissensus. A limine repudiandas esse eorum explicationes, qui cum Pelagianis, Zwinglianis etc. peccatum metonymice pro peccati poenis usurpari et mortem aliasque cor- . poris miserias designare dixerunt, eorumque qui simili admissa metonymia cum Socinianis ac rationalistis peccatum hic proclivitatem ad peccandum vel, quod idem fere est, concupiscentiam interpretantur, contexta oratio evidenter docet. Peccatum enim, quo mors in mundum intrasse dicitur, ab ipsa peccati poena diserte distinguitur atque velut poenae proprie dictae causa, i. e. velut reatus culpae, clare designatnr. Atqui concupiscentia vel proclivitas ad peccandum ipsa poenam non meretur, licet mali actus, qui ex ea procedunt , culpae reatum inducant. Neque mors igitur, quae peccati illius est poena, neque concupiscentia, etsi eam Apostolus aliquando « quia ex peccato est et ad peccatum inclinat » peccatum appellat (Conc. trid. sess. V. c. 5), nomine peccati hic designatur. Neque recte eos loqui censemus, qui nomine peccati hic « reale peccatum in genere » intelligunt (cfr Aberle Tüb. Quartalschr. 1855. p. 457; Simar p. 53 etc.). Nam Eva ante Adamum peccante, « peccatum reale » in mundum iam intraverat, sive mundus orbem terrarum sive genus hominum significare putatur. Si vero nomen &4apzía; eliam v. 13. « peccatum reale in genere » sonare obiiciunt, ad articulum nostra in sententia nomini bis praefixum attendant oportet, quo nomen eadem significatione in duabus illis sententiis, etsi sese excipiant, non usurpari clare docetur. Si eadem esset significatio, articulus qui v. 12. iam praefixus est, in v. 13. omitti non potuisset. Neque actualem Adami inobedientiam, sive velut personale eius peccatum consideratur sive imitatione ad eius posteros transisse dicitur, intelligere licet. Prior enim explicatio simili argumento, quo praecedentem refutavimus, excluditur; contra alteram vero bene iam S. Aug. (de pecc. mer. et rem. I. 9,9. 10) « si Apostolus, inquit, peccatum illud commemorare voluisset, quodin hunc mundum non propagatione sed imitatione transivit, eius principem (i. e. auctorem) non Adam sed diabolum diceret, de quo scriptum est : Ab initio diabolus peccat (1 Ioan. 3,8 cfr Sap. 2,94. 25)... Proinde Apostolus, quum illud peccatum et mortem commemoraret, quae ab uno in omnes propagatione transisset, eum principem posuit, a quo propagatio generis humani sum- Sit exordium. Imitantur quidem Adam, quotquot per inobedientiam transgrediuntur mandatum Dei; sed aliud est (peccatum), quod est exemplum voluntate peccantibus, aliud, quod origo est cum peccato nascentibus... Sicut ille, in quo omnes vivificantur, praeter quod se ad iustitiam exemplum imitantibus praebuit, dat etiam sui Spiritus occultissimam fidelibus gratiam, quam latenter infundit et parvulis, sic et ille, in quo omnes moriuntur, praeter quod eis, qui praeceptum Domini voluntate transgrediuntur, imitationis exemplum est, occulta etiam tabe concupiscentiae suae tabificavit in se omnes de sua stirpe venientes ». Praeterea actus ipse, quo Adam mandatum Dei transgressus est, quum in hoc tractatu «aoafac (praevaricatio s. transgressio v. 15), zxpxztogux (delictum s. lapsus vv. 15. 17. 18. 20), &ápáptryua (peccatum v. 16. saltem iuxta Vulg. et nonnullos codd. gr. cfr VV. LL.), zagaxct, (énobedientia v. 19) vocetur, suis iam nominibus ab illo peccato, de quo nostra in sententia agitur (5$ &papzía), distinguitur. Atque re quoque ab illo prorsus differt , quia ad illud sicut causa ad effectum se habere docetur, siquidem per wuntus inobedientiam multi (i. e. omnes) constituti csse peccatores (&gxprwci) i. e. peccato («3$ &gapzía) infecti esse dicuntur (v. 19) et per unius delictum (3 vs apazsoyazes) inductam esse asseritur condemnationem (v. 18), cui nimirum omnes subiacent utpote infecti illo peccato, quod per unum hominem inobedientia delinquentem in mundum intravit (cfr infra ad vv. 18. 19). Itaque in v. 12. 5, x«xpzíx nihil aliud significare potest nisi ipsum illud peccatum, quod originale vocamus, quia in primosuo ortu homo illud contrahit, quando humanam naturam amissione supernaturalis iustitiae, quam Deus omnibus hominibus inesse voluerat ideoque primo homini, ut illam posteris transmitteret , contulerat, pec illius delictum vitiatam reatuque culpae onustam induens filius divinae irae nascitur. Articulo praefixo autem Apostolus illud non tantum velut unicum in suo genere sed etiam velut lectoribus cognitum designat. Etenim, uti supra iam monuimus, ex illis, quae lectores admiserunt (unum sc. esse auctorem peccati illius, quo omnes posteri Adami velut proprio infecti nascuntur, illustrare voluit, quomodo ex uno Christo sit iustitia. qua omnes, qui Christi sunt, vere ac proprie iusti constituuntur. Ceterum hane esse genuinam nominis 7 &uzgzíx hoc in loco significationem, reliqua pericopes interpretatione clarius elucebit. cludit : « Si Adam non peceasset, Eva peccante, non per hoc fuisset peccatum traductum ad posteros ». Porro per peccatum (A «15 &yagsla; i. e. per illud peccatum, de quo sermo erat) mortem in mundum, i. e. in genus humanum, intrasse additur. Mortem hic non (uti infra 7,10 sqq.) spiritualem, qua anima gratia iustificante privatur (Orig. Pel. etc.) , neque directe (uti supra 1,32) aeternam, quae damnatos exspectat quamque S. Ioannes secundam appellat (Apoc. 2,11; 20,6 etc.), sed physicam, qua anima a corpore separatur, intelligendam esse, inde a S. Aug. (cfr de pecc. mer. et rem. 1. 8,8) et CArys. aetate plerique recte tenent, quoniam Apostolus non solum ad Gen. 2,17 et 3,17 sqq. aperte alludit, sed etiam statim (vv. 13. 14) ex physicae mortis universalitate universalitatem peccati originalis demonstrat. Libenter tamen aeternam connotari concedimus, quia id contextus postulare videtur; regnum enim mortis per Adami delictum introductae mox regno vitae per Christum allatae opponitur (v. 17 sqq.). Quae oppositio non essetsatis accurata, si sola mors physica intelligeretur, quandoquidem vita per Christum allata, omnibus concedentibus, praeter vitam corporis a mortuis resuscitati aeternam gloriam complectitur. Minus recte vero alii spiritualem quoque mortem comprehendi arbitrantur; etenim peccatum originale, per quod mors esse dicitur, quum in gratiae iustificantis privatione potissimum constet, non tam mortis spiritualis causa, quam ipsa mors spiritualis est. Uti autem nomine peccaíi (5; &yapzíz) hic ipsa Adami inobedientia non designatur, ita nomine mortis (8 04vaxcc) non intelligitur mors primi hominis, id quod haud pauci volunt, sed omnium hominum in genere mors physica, cuius remotior utique causa fuit primus noster parens Dei mandatum transgrediens. Duobus his prioribus membris Apostolus factum illud historicum in lectorum memoriam revocavit, ex quo de nexu causali peccati cum morte constat. lam vero statum rerum, qui in mundo est, huic facto respondere altera in sententiae parte addit : et ita (a: czw; i. e. iuxta intimum nexum, quem inter peccatum et mortem adesse et per Adamum peccantem in totum genus humanum intrasse historia docet) in omnes homines mors pertransiit, quia omnes peccaverunt. Probe animadvertatur oportet, particula z/a (22:o;) ad integra duo membra praecedentia pertinere neque nisi arbitrarie ac temere ad alterutrum aut ad alterutrius locutionem quandam posse restringi. Quamobrem genuinum sensum non attigisse dicendi sunt, qui illam aut ad sola prima vocabula retulerunt (e ?ta sc. per unum hominem), autad solum secundum membrum (e: ita sc. per peccatum), aut ad verbum intratit utrique membro commune (et ita sc. consequenter ad ingressum vel peccati ROM. 2,19. 919 vel mortis vel utriusque), aut ad solum nexum peccati cum morte, quamvis hi ultimi propius ad nostram explicationem pervenerint et in eo solo a vero aberrent, quod prima verba (per unum hominem) negligant. Haud pauci quidem, quia inter verba ci20:v (intravit) et &u0sv (pertransiit) oppositio quaedam haberi videtur, paenultimam explicationem praeferentes in priore sententiae parte de ?ngressu peccati mortisque in mundum, in altera de eorumdem di/fusione in omnes homines sermonem esse statuunt; at immerito id fieri ex praecedentium membrorum explicatione satis elucet. Immo vero ex historico factoin illis commemorato quasi conclusionem ad praesentem rerum statum explicandum derivans Apostolus pro diversitate substantivorum, quibus in utroque membro universalitatem hominum designat, verba variat : « Mors zn mundum, i. e. in totum hominum genus, intravit sese in omnes ac singulos homines diffundens ». scribit » ? Nonne splendidior quoque apparet victoria, quam Christus de morte retulit, si non tantum omnes, quos mors sibi velut praedam iam vindicavit, vita eis restituta eripit, verum etiam aliquos, in quos mors ius certum sibi vindicat, in vita conservat? Mortem, quae per unum hominem in universum genus humanum intravit, ad omnes et singulos pertinere homines, tam manifestum est, ut a nullo possit addubitari neque probatione indigeat. Quoniam vero causa huius universalitatis minus clare apparet, B. Paulus eam in ultimo membro manifestat ad causalem peccati mortisque nexum respiciens, de quo ex historiae fide constare iam dixerat. Egregie quippe ZÀom. monet, Apostolum ordinem in priore sententiae parte servatum in altera invertere : ibi quasi historicorum more a causa (peccato) ad effectum (mortem) progreditur; hic vero « prius agit de universalitate mortis tamquam de manifestiore, deinde tangit universalitatem peccati ». Itaque in omnes mors pertransiit, in quo (i. e. eo quod vel quia) omnes peccaverunt, vel melius : peccaverant, siquidem aor. uzprz hic,.uti saepius in sententiis secundariis, pro plusquamperfecto est usurpatus. Peccante nimirum Adamo, per cuius inobedientiam omnes constituti sunt peccatores (v. 19) cuiusque delicto omnes mortui sunt (v. 15), ipsoque actu, quo ille peccavit, posteros eius omnes peccasse Apostolus significat, ita ut moriantur, quia in illo et cum illo peccaverunt, eidemque mortis poenae obnoxii sint, quia in divini mandati, cuius observatio sub mortis poena praecepta erat, partem quandam habuerunt. Cum eo autem et in eo omnes dicuntur peccasse, utique non voluntate propria, quae nondum exstitit, sed ipsius protoparentis voluntate, qui a Deo ita erat constitutus caput generis humani, ut eius praevaricatio ad omnes eius posteros quodam modo pertineret omnesque vere ac proprie peccatores constitueret. Magnum quidem est mysterium, quomodo Adam sua inobedientia omnes, qui naturali generatione ab eo descendunt, peccato ita infecerit, ut singulis sit proprium; at minus mysterium non est, quomodo secundus Adam, Christus, sua obedientia omnes, qui per ipsum regenerantur, vere ac proprie iustos constituerit, ut illis iustitia sit propria. De his mysteriis disserere eaque, quantum eius fieri potest, illustrare theologorum est; nos id unum asserimus, verbis paulinis i2' o civ:s; £yxpizv sententiam quam diximus clare contineri. Si quis enim obiecerit, verba Zn eo et cum eo a Paulo non esse expressa ac temere a nobis inseri, ea ex contextu, quum tota sententia primis verbis per unum hominem regatur, sua sponte suppleri respondemus, Apostolumque alibi, ubi de vicaria Christi morte loquitur, eodem plane modo verba in eo et cum eo prudenti lectori supplenda reliquisse : « si unus pro omnibus mortuus est, ergo omnes mortui sunt » sc. in eo et cum eo secundum veterem suum hominem (cfr Comment. in 2 Cor. p. 161 sqq.). Quodsi porro moderni acath. multi (Reuss, Mang. Weiss ec.) istud ég' o zvsez £uxpzzv ita cum Pelagianis intelligere volunt, utomnes propter sua actualia peccata, quibus Adami inobedientiam sint imitati, mortis poenae obnoxii dicantur, ab ipso Paulo refutantur, qui mortem in eos quoque regnasse docet, qui non peccassent in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae (rv. 13. 15), peccata actualia ergo, quae morte essent punienda, non haberent. Qui demum ipxpzávew in his verbis idem esse volunt quod i4agzo*£v wxsascaffzvat (peccare i. q. peccatorem constitui), ii ad verborum proprietatem non satis attendunt; siquidem àyap-zvsv» nusquam nisi de actu ipso peccati usurpatur, quo aliquis utique deinde peccalor constituitur habituali peccato perdurante. Iuxta nostram ergo explicationem omnes in Ad«amo0 peccasse, ex paulinis verbis quasi indirecte per modum fere sensus consequentis eruitur; plerique tamen antiquiores Latini directe id declarari tenent, quum dictionis latinae in quo pronomen relativum ad prima sententiae verba per unum hominem (sc. Adam) referendum esse arbitrentur. Quorum dux est S. Aug., qui ab initio quidem dubitavit, utrum pronomen quo ad nomen peccati (per peccatum mors) an ad nomen /Aominis (per unum hominem peccatum) esset referendum (cfr de pecc. mer. et rem. I. 10,11), postea vero animadvertens « in graeco, unde translata sit epistola, peccatum feminino genere esse positum » (sc. 5, X&agiía efr c. duas epp. Pel. 1V, 4,7), verba Zn qwo non nisi 2n Adamo explicari posse sibi persuasit. At haud recte. Praeprimis enim constructio ipsa iam prohibet, quominus pronomen quo ad nomen tam remotum duobusque membris interiectis separatum referatur. Deinde linguae graecae leges, quemadmodum non permittunt, ut pronomen o ad nomen feminin. referatur, ctiam. non permittunt, ut praepositioni iz: ille sensus attribuatur, quem S. 4uy. (et cum eo alii Latini) praepositioni latinae i» hic attvibuit, quando ait : « Restat ut in illo primo homine omnes peccasse intelligantur, quia /a i//o fuerint omnes [sc. seminaliter, uti alibi addit], quando ille peccavit, unde peccatum nascendo trahitur » (c. duas epp. Pel. IV. 5, 7). Ad hunc enim inclusionis sensum exprimendum graeca praepositio i» omnino requiritur, neque ullus inter graecos interpretes unquam nostrum is' substituto iv o explicavit. Sunt quidem inter Graecos et inter modernos acath., qui nostro in loco pronomen à pro mascul. habeant illudque ad alterutrum ex praecedentibus substant. masc. referant, sc. aut ad & &vt; &v0póou aut ad & 0ivaz«;. Verumtamen qui illud ad unum hominem referunt, praepositioni iz! causalem sensum attribuunt (i. q. propter) eamque praepositioni ài c. acc. aequiparant, ita ut ad pelagianam explicationem proxime accedant. Inter quos Theoph. ac praesertim Oec., ig9' ó idem essc censens quod Z' &», his verbis suam ipsius interpretationem proponit : « Ne quis Deum accuset iniustitiae, quod Adamo lapso nos moriamur, Paulus subiungit i9' à «&vceg £uzptov (propter quem omnes peccarunt) ac si diceret : ipse principium praebuit et causam, quod omnes ad eius similitudinem peccavimus », suo nimirum exemplo nos &d peccatum invitans (a5:3; «3j» ápyj» xalvi,v alziav capéoye, 6xt mávzes fpáptopsv xazk t3,» buciucty abxoo). Qui vero pronomen 6ó ad substant. 5 0zvavcz referunt, uti antiquitus teste Photio aliqui Graeci et hodie aliqui acath. (Hofm. etc.), ii praepositione iz! aut finem, vel si mavis eventum, ad quem peccatum tendit vel ducit, declaratum vident (« et ita in omnes pertransiit mors, ad quam [quasi tendentes vel perventuri] peccarunt ») aut tempus, quo omnes peccarunt (« et ita in omnes pertransiit mors, qua exsistente et dominante omnes peccarunt »). At neque ad Adamum neque ad mortem referendum esse pronomen, neque quidquam quoque esse supplendum, iuremerito PAot. (Amphil. V. 84. M. 101, 553 sq.) monuit. « Nam ie' 6, inquit, hic non ad personam neque ad quasi personam refertur, sed potius causam indicat atque i9' o ziv- *:; Yoxpts» est idem quod àé« (propterea quod) záv:s; £uapiov ». Huiusmodi deinde significationis verborum i;' ó sexcenta exempla in profanorum scriptis exstare addit, se tamen solius Pauli auctoritatem velle afferre, qui 2 Cor. 5, & verba zo' ó pro causali coniunctione (1. q. 2z) adhibuerit!. Photio autem eadem in significatione admittenda iam praciverant Orig. et Theod., atque forte etiam CArys., quamvis minus clare loquatur. Probe autem animadvertatur oportet, ab antiquioribus Latinis Graecos non recte in suas partes trahi, quia non tam graeca corum verba, quam latinam verborum interpretationem inspexerunt. lam vero interpretes operum patristicorum eodem modo, quo vulgatus noster, saepenumero praepositionis ici c. dat. causalem sensum latino in cum abl. reddiderunt, sed de illo inclusionis sensu, quem Ag. aliique Latini praepositioni 2» hic attribuere volunt, non cogitarunt. Cfr quae de causali significatione praepos. in alibi iam diximus (Coiiment. in 1 Cor. p. 20; Comment. in 2 Cor. p. 1&3), et quae de Graecorum interpretatione egregie disseruerunt Patrizi S. I. Comm. de pecc. orig. propag. Romae 1851 p. 26 sqq. et in italica dissert. de eodem argumento. Roma 1876; Beelen Comm. in ep. ad Rom. p. 153 sq.; Palmieri S. I. de Deo creante. Romae 1878 p. 504 sqq.). Ad paulinum usum locutionis i9' o, quae etiatn a Syro hic pro causali coniunctione habetur, quod atlinet, illa a Paulo nostra tantum in sententia tribusque aliis in locis usurpata est. A vulgato quidem nostro interprete diversimode redditur (hic et PAZ. 3,12 : in quo, sed 2 Cor. 5,& : eo quod, et Phil. &,10 : sicut); dubium autem non est, quin secunda interpretatio (eo quod vel propterea quod!, nam £g' o est pro ixi 10019 $x)) sit praeferenda. Causalis enim significatio et hic et 9 Cor. 5,5 et PAil. 3,19 certa dici potest, et PAil. 4,10 saltem est longe probabilior, quia comparativa, quae a Vulg. et Syr. ibi eligitur, sensum parum aptum gignit?. Ceterum eam pro causali coniunctione ex iunioribus Latinis iam sumserunt Cai. et Serip.; eandem explicationem probabilem habuerunt Tol. Salm. Bellarm. (Controv. de gr. amiss. IV. 3) Est. Lap. etc., ac velut certam sine ulla haesitatione adoptarunt moderni fere omnes (Patrizi l. c., Jeel., Retthm., Mai. Disp. LR. Weinh. Sch. etc.); similiter plerique moderni acath., inter quos o4. nostrum locum bene interpretatur. Itaque illud supponens, quod lectoribus modo in memoriam revocaverat, mortem per peccatum in genus humanum intrasse et in singulos transisse, ita ut in hoc rerum ordine mors semper sit poena peccati, S. Paulus iam probat, homines revera ideo mori, quia in ct cum Adamo peccaverint.
5:13
13. Usque ad legem enim peccatum (xyxgcíx sine artic.) erat in mundo; peccatum (xyagzíx sine avt.) autein non imputabatur quum lez non esset (vel iuxta graec. : ágaptía 8& obx. XAeetzat yi; $vtos vópos cum Amiat. aliisque lat. : peccatum autem non imputatur, quum lez non est);
5:14
15. sed regnavit mors ab Adam usque ad Moysen etiam in eos qui non peccaverunt in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae, qui est forma (z5zss) futuri vel secundi Adae, i. e. Christi. « Omnium consensu obscurissimas ac difficillimas » esse has sententias, nonnulli haud sine ratione dixerunt (Tol. Salm. Iust. etc.), si ad plurimas ac maxime diversas earum explicationes attendimus, quae inde a Patrum aetate propositae sunt. Nihilominus satis claram apertamque esse apostolicam argumentationem censebit, quicumque idearum nexu diligenter considerato intellexerit, Paulum assertum suum, omnes propter peccatum in Adamo commissum morti esse obnoxios, argumento quasi negativo vel potius excludente demonstrare velle, atque iuxta hunc Apostoli scopum nonnulla verba, quae per se ambigua sunt, explicaverit. Ne quis enim homines propter sua quemque peccata actualia in hac vita commissa mortis poena puniri obiiciat, Apostolus lectorum attentionem ad illud tempus convertit, quo nondum erat lata Lex mosaica, quae transgressoribus mortem comminabatur, solaque vigebat lex naturalis cordibus inscripta, quae eiusmodi sanctionem non habet annexam. Ex eo igitur, quod illius aetatis peccata actualia ob legis, quae in transgressores poenam mortis statueret, defectum non potuerint morte puniri (v. 13), nihilominus autem etiam illa aetate omnes dominio mortis subiecti fuerint (v. 15), iure merito concludit, mortis poenam omnibus infligi, quia in Adami inobedientia, quae iuxta praeceptum in paradiso datum morte punienda erat, partem quandam habuerint. Pro more tamen suo hanc conclusionem, quia ex praemissis sua sponte innotescit, diserte non enuntiat. Sed singula accuratius examinemus. Germanam huius loci intelligentiam cum S. Aug. (expos. nn. 27. 98; de pecc. mer. et rem. f. 10,12; c. lulian. VI. 4,9 etc.) ac plerisque graecis PP. (Orig. Chrys. Theod. Cyr A. etc.) multi quoque antiquiores Latini (/1aym. Herv. Lomb. Thom. etc.) erronea verborum usque ad legem (Xygv v242») interpretatione sibi obstruxerunt. Etenim nomine legis ($5225), quamvis in graeco articulus desit (uti etiam 2,12 sqq. 23. 23 etc.), mosaicam designari recte tenentes in eo errarunt, quod praepositione zyezx («sque ad) male explicata non initium sed finem terminumque Legis indicari arbitrati totum tempus ab Adam usque ad Christum significari vellent!. Licet enim particulae synonymae yg et nézgr interdum ita usurpentur, ut finem rei, de qua agitur, respiciant, per se ergo nihil obstet, quominus locutio £;p« v£42» explicetur usque ad finem Legis!, hoc tamen in loco haec explicatio et altero membro, quo idem tempus verbis ab Adam usque ad Moysen definitur, plane excluditur atque illis parum consonat, quibus zn/ra (v. 20) ipsum initium Legis velut terminus intermedius inter Adam et Christum proponitur. Quamobrem cum Lyr. Dion. aliisque antiquioribus ( TheopA. Oec. etc.) omnes fere iuniores ac moderni (Cai. Tol. Salm. Iust. etc. ; Beel. M Ev. Mai. Bisp. etc.) solum tempus antemosaicum , quo homines in statu legis naturalis degebant, verbis usque ad Legem designari iure tenent. Haud recte quoque nonnulli antiquiores (Herv. Thom. etc.) peccatum (&yapxía), quod eo tempore adfuisse Paulus testatur, intelligunt originale, acsi &gap:ía hic idem significaret, quod 5 &papzix in versu praecedente; neque enim in nostra sententia deesse posset articulus, si nomen eodem sensu, quo v. 12, esset sumendum. Cum plerisque ergo peccatum actuale in genere, quod tempore antemosaico non defuisse tota historia primitiva clamat, intelligi omnino debet. Verumtamen actualia peccata, quae ante legislationem sinaiticam committebantur et erant in mundo, i. e. in genere humano?, hominibus illius aetatis non fuerunt neque esse potuerunt causa mortis. Quod demonstraturus Paulus iuxta graecam lectionem consuetam axioma affert universale : peccatum autem non imputatur lege non ezsistente, iuxta latinam vero lectionem usitatiorem eodem axiomate ad periodum antemosaicam applicato et quasi limitato utitur : peccatum autem non imputabatur quum lex non esset. Utra lectio praeferatur, ad sensum nihil interest, quia. neutra vim argumenti deminuit. Contra plerosque tamen modernos latinam praeferendam arbitror quum ob criticorum testium eam tuentium maiorem auctoritatem (ad duos quippe versiones antiquissimas, /t. et Syr., duo accedunt optimi codd. graeci, N et A, cum multis graecis lectionariis, cfr VV. LL.) , tum ob maiorem sermonis concinnitatem. Namque hoc membrum coniunctione 2£ (autem) priori opponi haud recte diceretur, neque satis apte ei dicitur subiungi, ac si Minor esset syllogismi cuiusdam, sed ei dicendum est adnecti (8£ metabat.), ut argumentum historicum inchoatum , quod v. 14. completur, continuet. Unde imperfectum éveXeysetzo (imputabatur), quod praecedenti.$» (erat) et sequenti i£ac(.eocsv (regnavit) respondet, historicae argumentationi magis videtur convenire. Porro dubium non est, quin nomen áyapzía; (sine artic.) eodem sensu, quo in priore membro, sit sumendum ac peccatum actuale in genere significet, parum recte vero ab aliquibus antiquioribus (Herv. Thom. etc.) utroque in membro intelligatur originale. Maior autem est interpreium dissensus, quo sensu verbum ZXAzy:zt» et nomen viípo) hic sumi debeant. Iamvero verbum &XXzyctv, quod semel tantum a profanis in inscriptione quadam (BoecKA Inscr. gr. I. p. 850. a. 35) et bistantum in Scripturis (hic et PAilem. 18) adhibitum legitur, synonymum esse verbo A27/2ec0zt (cfr ad &,3) , ita ut proxime significet ?» rationes referre et latino imputare rccte reddatur, ex PAilem. 18. clarissime elucet. A quo porro et ad quid peccatum in rationes non sit velatum vel non sit imputatum, disertis quidem verbis non enuntiatur, satis aperte tamen contextu declaratur, qui de imputatione caque divina peccati ad poenam non qualemcumque sed ad poenam mortis agi docet. Nam statim (v. 15) universale mortis dominium velut divina poena toti generi humano inflicta supponitur. A Deo igitur peccata ante mosaicam legislationem commissa in rationes non sunt relata tamquam supplicio mortis digna; additur autem, id non esse factum, quia ler non erat eo tempore. Quo ex nexu iterum clarum est, de divina lege morali in genere non agi (nemo enim negat eo tempore legem naturalem divinitus cordibus inscriptam adfuisse), verum de divina quadam lege positiva (i. e. externe promulgata), quae similiter atque praeceptum Adamo datum multaque mosaicae Legis praecepta, immo similiter atque tota Lex mosaica transgressoribus suis poenam mortis comminabatur. Quia latinam lectionem sequimur, per se nihil impedit, quin nomine /egisin hoc membro ipsam mosaicam directe intelligamus, praesertim quia in priore huius sententiae membro /er eodem sensu sumitur. Nihilominus generaliorem explicationem propositam praeferimus, quia Apostolus, uti ex sequente sententia effici videtur, etiam praeceptum in paradiso datum ante oculos habuit. Hic ergo erit sententiae sensus : Adam morte punitus est, quia divinum praeceptum transgressori mortem indicens transgressus est; ab eius autem lapsu usque ad mosaicam Legem, quae eandem mortis sanctionem annexam habuit, non fuit divina lex, quae in peccatores poenam mortis statueret; ergo homines illius aetatis, quamvis divinam legem cordibus inscriptam frequenter violarent, propter haec sua crimina morte nec puniti sunt nec puniri potuerunt. Si quis vero obiicit, eo tempore homines diluvio universali, incendio sodomitico etc. propter sua peccata divinitus esse deletos, recte respondetur, eis non ipsam mortem sed genus mortis fuisse poenam peccatorum actualium ; morti enim etiam Noe filiique eius, Lot eiusque filiae etc. occubuerunt, quamvis criminum, quae diluvio et incendio divinitus punita sunt, non essent rei. intelligens explicat : « Antequam Lex daretur, non agnoscebatur peccatum tam grave malum esse, sicut per Legem ostensum est » vel eliam : « Quum Lex deesset, non imputabatur i. e. ignorabatur, qua poena dignum esset peccatüm '! ». Quae omnia refutatione non indigent; vix aptior est explicatio, quam sequuntur Zap. M Ev. : « Peccatum non imputabatur, i. e. viz reputabatur, vir aestimabatur ab hominibus solam naturam et concupiscentiam suam sequentibus neque legem, quae peccati foeditatem ostenderet, habentibus ». Miram expositionem affert. Est.; licet recte de divina imputatione peccatorum actualium agi teneat, ad 4,45 (ubi non est lez, nec praevaricatio) respiciens ante Legem mosaicam peccatum « ad praevaricationem » non esse imputatum censet. Quid autem est peccatum actuale nisi praevaricalio vel transgressio legis alicuius? Ac profecto ante Legem mosaicam aderat lex quaedam, quam homines transgredientes rei fiebant praevaricationis. Sed haec sufficiunt; acatholicorum enim sententias varias, quae numero pauciores non sunt, recensere operae pretium non est. Altera iam sequitur augmentationis pars, quae per coniunctionem adversativam àxA£ (attamen, nihilominus) priori magna cum vi opponitur : ante Legem sinaiticam peccata actualia, quae etiam tunc temporis in mundo fuisse historia testatur, morte puniri non potuerunt, nihilominus regnavit mors ab Adam usque ad Moysen, i.c. non tantum in mundo ita fuit, ut dumtaxat aliquos abriperet, sed dominium suum exercuit, ita ut nemo ei sese subtrahere posset; unde sua sponte, quum mors sit poena peccati, efficitur, alio peccato homines illius uetatis poenam mortis sibi attraxisse, illo nimirum, quo omnes in ct cum Adamo inobediente peccaverunt. Ad explicandam autem vel iuxta alios ad augendam argumenti sui vim Apostolus addit, mortem eo tempore regnasse etiam in eos, qui non. peccaverunt àn similitudinem praevaricationis Adae. luxta priorem sententiam « non peccare in similitudinem pracvaricationis Adae » dicuntur illi, qui non similiter. atque protoparens, divinam legem, cui mortis sanctio annexa cst, transgrediuntur; omnes igitur, qui ante Legem degerunt, liac formula designantur atque uti ab Adam, ita etiam ab iis, qui sub Lege degentes in similitudinem praevaricalionis Adae peccare potuerunt, discernuntur. luxta alteram. vero sententiam, quam S. 4w7. (de pecc. mer. et rem. I. 11,13) et S. Hier. (c. Pelag. IlI. 18) proposuerunt, Paulus duas classes hominum, qui ante Legem degerunt, distinguit, eorum qui propria sua voluntate peccata actualia committentes similes facti sint Adamo propria voluntate peccanti, et eorum, qui « nondum sua et propria voluntate, sicut ille, peccarint, sed ab illo peccatum originale contraxerint ». Eatenus igitur hac explicatione vis argumenti augeri putatur, quatenus mors non tantum in adultos, qui peccata actualia habuerunt, sed in ipsos quoque infantes, qui actualiter peccare nondum potuerunt, ante Legem dominium suum exercuisse dicatur. Utraque explicatio probabilis est; priorem tamen praefero, quia Apostolus in hoc suo argumento maxime ad divinae legis, quae peccato violatur, sanctionem attendit. S. Aug. alibi (expos. n. 29; ad Hilar. ep. 157,19) verba in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae per hyperbaton cum prioribus melius connecti censet, ut « mors in similitudinem praevaricationis Adae regnasse » dicatur « in eos qui non peccarunt »; eundem nexum Chrys. quoque indicat nonnullique iuniores (praesertim 7l.) alteri omnino praeferunt. Rationem quippe illis verbis a Paulo afferri volunt, « quare mors in eos qui non (actualiter) peccarunt regnaverit », atque hanc rationem esse, « quia inerat eorum in membris similitudo praevaricationis Adae », sc. peccatum originale (S. Au. l. c.). Hunc nexum per se admitti sensumque istum ex paulinis verbis extundi posse non nego, quandoquidem Apostolus a hyperbatis non abhorret et graeca locutio £xi «i. égow)azt non minus quam in similitudine (uti S. Aug. in ep. 157,19 legit) per se apte explicetur propter similitudinem (cfr quae de ig' à in quo ad v. 129 p. 981 sqq. diximus). Verumtamen non tantum hic nulla adest ratio, qua ad satis durum hyperbaton confugere cogimur, sed sensus quoque, qui exoritur, contextui aegerrime adaptatur. Fere tota enim vis argumenti perit, neque intelligitur, quomodo Paulus, postquam mortem in omnes transisse docuit, quia omnes peccassent (v. 12), nunc asserere potuerit, mortem in eos qui non peccaverunt regnasse, Quare consuetum nexum, quem reliqui fere omnes sequuntur, relineamus oportet. De altera huius membri lectione, quae negationem praetermittit (£ri zouq &uaprroavras in eos qui peccaverunt), fusius disserere opus non est, quia sufficiente auctoritate critica destituitur, quamvis Oij., vel potius latinus eius interpres /Zuf., et A'tr eam secuti sint (cfr VV. LL.) et aliqui antiquiores Latini eam commemorent. Ultimis v. 1& verbis : qui (Adam) est forma futuri, Apostolus, uti supra (p. 273 sq.) iam ostendimus, sententiam v. 12 inchoatam argumentoque vv. 13.15 in suspenso relictam resumit altero comparationis membro addito, constructione utique anacoluthica et sententia subobscura. Quomodo verba sint exponenda , ut priori membro aperte respondeant, iam diximus (l. c.). Reenim vera Adam vocatur forma futuri (sóz2s 109 p £)Acvtoc), 1. e. figura prophetica! illius Adam, qui venturus est secundus vel novissimus generis humani parens, sc. Christi (cfr ad 1 Cor. 15,44 sqq.), quatenus Adam nobis factus est auctor peccati et mortis, Christus vero auctor iustitiae ac vitae. Sunt quidem aliae quoque similitudines inter Adamum et Christum, propter quas prior alterius typus vel figura prophetica. recte appellari potest (cfr 7Ao. ctc., lust. etc.), sed ad eam solam, quam diximus, utpote praecipuam, Apostolum attendisse, ex contextu apparet. Futurus vero Adam Christus non dicitur relate ad nos, ac si hoc in loco desecundo adventu glorioso Christi ageretur (id quod aliqui moderni acath. opinati sunt), sed relate ad primum Adam, quandoquidem de opere redemtionis Christi agitur. Origo quippe ac diffusio salutis per obedientiam Christi redemtoris in cruce morientis toti generi humano acquisitae comparatur cum origine diffusioneque condemnationis per Adami inobedientiam in totum genus invectae. Hoc sensu CArys. Adamum vocari typum Christi recte dicit, « quia sicut ille ex seortis, quamquam non comederant de ligno, causa fuit mortis per cibum illum inductae, ita et Christus suis, quamquam non recte egerant, iustitiae conciliator fuit, quam per crucem nobis omnibus largitus est ». Similiter S. Aug. (ad Hilar. ep. 157,20) : « Adam forma Christi a contrario est, ut quemadmodum in illo omnes moriuntur, ita in Christo omnes vivificentur, et quomodo per ipsius inobedientiam peccatores constituti sunt multi, sic et per Christi obedientiam iusti constituantur multi ». Alteram quidem eodem in loco S. Doctor addit expositionem, quam alibi (de pecc. mer. et rem. T. 11,13) solam proponit; Adamum enim /ormam futuri gencris ex eo exorti appellari posse censet, « quia ipse inflixerit formam mortis posteris suis »; sed iure merito eam ipse in epist. ad Hilar. minus aptam dicit et alibi (de nupt. et concup. II. 27,56) prorsus practermittit; nam contextui non consonat. Multo autem minus apta ct longius quaesita est tertia expositio nonnullorum acath. (cfr BHeng. Koppe, Wilke etc.), iuxta quos pronomen rcelat. 2; (qui) per attractionem ad substantivum praedicati (75x25) positum est pro neutro 2 (quod) et gcnetivus 29 u£XAzvzos (futuri) non est masculini scd neutrius generis, ita ut «c9 y£AAovzos prO 7:55 ueAAciQs Suznpizs xai zu Slt; sensus igitur foret: « ea quae de origine et propagatione peccati mortisque dicta sunt, typus futurae salutis et vitae sunt ». Ad ea, quae proxime sequuntur, prospiciens PAot. (cfr Oec.) haud absurde adnotat, in eiusmodi typis tria esse consideranda, similitudinem, contrarietatem, excessum in similitudine (izzic5zx, ivavtamta ÜntpfcA$» xazà Th» iposc5-a); hoc autem in loco contrarietatem in eo esse, quod peccatum et immunitas a peccato, inimicitia adversus Deum et reconciliatio cum Deo, condemnatio et iustificatio, interitus lapsus mors et salus vita resurrectio inter se sint opposita; similitudinem in eo, quod sicut per unum omnibus mala evenerint. ita omnibus bona contigerint per unum; excessum in eo, quod in malis multi uni sint cooperati, ut ea sibi attraherent, in bonis autem nemo sit cooperatus, ut uni Christo donum debeatur, quodque Christus non tantum mala per Adamum invecta abstulerit sed etiam eorum loco multa dona contulerit. Profecto Apostolus, antequam similitudinem v. 12 indicatam fusius explanet (vv. 18. 19), dissimilitudinem vv. 15-17 exponere voluit, ut mala per unum inducta per unum auferri potuisse confirmaret (cfr supra p. 271. 273). Quem in finem praeprimis fontem, ex quo mala profluxerunt, cum bonorum fonte in se ipsis (Sa/m.), i. e. secundum suam naturam et efficacitatem , comparat (v. 15), ut deinde potentioris causae potentiores quoque esse effectus ostendat (vv. 16. 17). Ne quis igitur Adamum esse typum Christi audiens perfectam inter eos in omnibus esse similitudinem vel potius aequalitatem praepropere et inconsulte concludat, Paulus statim lectorum attentionem ad eorum dissimilitudinem convertit :
5:15
15. sed non sicut delictum (55 zapízzoyga) $a et donum (z5 yzpwyx); sd. enim unius delicto multi (ot «oXAst) mortui sunt , multo magts gratia (t /3g) Dei et donum (5, 3oesa) in gratia unius hominis Iesu Christi in plures (si; «20g «9AAcdq cum S. Aug.! lege : in multos) abundavit. Plerique hac iam in sententia, sicut in. duabus sequentibus, effectus inobedientiae Adami et obedientiae Christi comparari arbitrantes nomina z£ zapariopa et có y&gwua ita interpretantur, ut priore metonymice (causa pro effectu) damnum peccato Adami procreatum, altera gratia per Christum hominibus acquisita et collata designentur. Ne tamen cum nonnullis acath. (Mor. Rüch., etc.) Apostolum quasi eadem aliis verbis semper repetentem verbositatis incusare cogamur, attendamus oportet eum hac in sententia, quemadmodum iam diximus, causas ipsas inter se conferre (cfr Salm. Tol., etc. — God., etc.). Itaque «» «apázteya (quod nomen proprie lapsum significat vel rectae viae derelictionem, neque male a Vulg. vertitur delictum!) hic ipsam actualem Adami inobedientiam denotat (cfr
5:18
v. 18. per unius delictum,
5:19
v. 19, per inobedientiam. untus), 5» y&pwua autem, uti recte monet Sa/m., hic non est gratia per Christum nobis collata nobisque inhaerens, sed ipsum quasi opus redemtionis, Christi nimirum in cruce morientis obedientia (v. 19) Patri oblata, quae oblatio, quum pro nobis peccatoribus facta divinam erga nos caritatem commendet (v. 8 sq.), apte relate ad nos vocatur yáowya, i. e. gratuitum caritatis donum (cfr ad 1, 11). Porro illa duo non eadem ratione se habere, i. e. aequalia non esse, argumento probatur, quod hypotheticu quidem constructione proponitur, nihil tamen dubitationis habet, quia de conditionis impletione iuxta superiora abunde inter omnes constat (cfr similia argumenta vv. 10. 17; 2 Cor. 3, 9. 11, etc.). Ex eo enim, quod Adami delictum suam efficaciam in omnes exercuerit, a fortiore concludi vult, donum quoque aequalem, immo maiorem efficientiam in omnes exercere potuisse. Quem ferein sensum CA»ys. : « Si delictum idque unius hominis tantum valuit, gratia et quidem Dei gratia, neque Patris tantum sed et Filii gratia, quomodo non longe praevalebit? Hoc enim rationi multo magis est consonum. Quod enim alter propter alterum plectatur, id minus aequum videtur. Quod vero alter propter alterum servetur, id profecto magis est decorum et consentaneum; si ergo illud, multo magis hoc factum est » (cfr ZAeod. Theoph. etc., Salm. Tol. etc., Reith. Mai. etc.). Ad singula quod attinet, ante omnia adnotamus, locutione ci «oAAzí (multi illi, die Vielen) iuxta notissimum graecae linguae idiotisnum hic, uti saepius (v. 18 cfr v. 19; 19, 5; 1 Cor. 10, 17), omnes designari, una nimirum ex parte multitudinem omnium illorum, qui ab Adamo naturali generatione descendunt, altera ex parte multitudinem omnium illorum, qui per Christum regenerantur (cfr ad v. 19 et ad 1 Cor. 15, 22). Quam locutionem ideo, opinor, Apostolus elegit, ut et delictum et donum non tam in totam collectionem, quam in singula eius membra, quamvis multa sint, efficaciam suam exercuisse clarius appareret. Ex toto deinde contextu elucet, verbo àz£zvev (mortui sunt) proxime physicam mortem designari, spiritualem tamen connotari, quatenus physica mors velut poena consideratur, quae in omnes transiit, quia omnes in et cum protoparente peccarunt (v. 12). Tertio attendatur oportet, quomodo duae causae inter se oppositae describantur; quum enim delictum (5 zagsxzwya) dumtaxat unius (vc9 £v) hominis fuisse dicatur, donum (:» yápwyz) vero definiatur gratia Dei et donum (f, 3ups&) in gratia unius hominis Iesu Christi, verbis ipsis iam docetur, dono (:à zagísua:) multo veriorem certioremque (atque etiam maiorem), quam delicto (-à zapxz:oyazt), efficaciam competere; « potentior enim est Deus ad benefaciendum, quam homo ad malefaciendum et nocendum » (Tol.). Gratia Dei (4, 43g; 29 O«25), quuma dono (1 &op:z) hic distinguatur. iuxta primariam vocis significationem recte intelligitur divina benevolentia, ex qua tamquam ex fonte suo omnia bona in nos emanant (cfr Eph. 1, 7; 2. 7; Luc. 1, 30; Act. 7, &6 etc.); irae ergo Dei quasi opponitur, i. e. divinae iustitiae vindicativae, quae peccato poenam debitam irrogat (cfr ad 1, 18). Ex hac porro gratia Dei etiam donum (5 $»e:x) emanat, quod consistit in. gratia unius hominis Iesu Christi (cfr. Act. T, 19), vel minus recte iuxta alios : quod nobis contingit per gratiam unius hominis Iesu Christi. Si prior explicatio, uti decet, praefertur, gratia Iesu. Christi omnia quidem beneficia complecti dicenda est, quae morte sua hominibus promeruit nobisque confert, maxime autem iustitiam significat (v. 17); si altera praefertur, gratia Iesu Christi simili modo, quo 2 Cor. 8, 19, explicari potest, ut omnia quidem, quae ad nos redimendos egit ac pertulit, potissimum tamen obedientiam significet, qua mortem cruentam in se suscepit. In. utraque autem Christus velut mediator consideratur, per quem donum ex benevolentia Dei emanans ad nos pervenire debuit, atque humanitas eius effertur (unius hominis Iesu Christt) non tantum, ut uni homini, per quem cuncti peccato infecti sunt ac moriuntur, opponatur, sed etiam, ut de eius munere redemtoris et mediatoris agi intelligatur. Iuxta hanc interpretationem, quam cum Salm. multi moderni sequuntur (Reith. Mai. LR. Ag. etc. — God. Weiss etc.), verba &v zig x^ velut appositio En cum nomine 1, 2ogs& connectenda sunt (ac si scriptum sit : 4, 2upsz $4; é&v yágut xA); eui nexui omissionem articuli ante appositionem non obstare, saepeiam monuimus (cfr Comment. in 1 Cor. p. 60 etc.). Cum plerisque tamen antiquioribus iunioribusque etiam nonnulli moderni (Bee/. Bisp Sch. etc. — Rück. Ew. Mey. etc.)ad nomen $ ops, quod complementum quoddam postulat, genetivum «c9 O«c5 supplent (quasi scriptum sit : 5, /4ots xat $, 3upsa «o0 8:22) ac verba iv ziptct x7, quae prioribus «à zxezz:ogazt 725 £v; Sola opponi censent, cum verbo izepíessucev coniungunt : « gratia et donum Dei in multos per gratiam unius hominis Iesu Christi abundavit ». Quam explicationem secutus Thom. « sicut peccatum, inquit, ex uno homine abundavit in multos ex prima suggestione diaboli, ita et gratia Dei per unum hominem processit ad multos; unde signanter addit Apostolus in gratia i. e. per gratiam unius hominis Iesu Christi; sic enim a Deo gratia in multos effunditur, ut eam per Christum accipiant ». Si sensus in universum spectatur, haec explicatio haud multum quidem a nostra discrepat; minus tamen videtur apta, quia multo minus clare ostendit, quo cum iure Apostolus a minore ad maius concludens dono certiorem quam delicto efficientiam attribuat, quum una ex parte unius hominis delictum , altera ex parte wnzus hominis gratia sola velut causae ponantur. Id autem tenendum est, in hac sententia praeprimis maiorem certitudinem efficaciae doni enuntiari. Quod autem gratia Dei simul dicitur in multos aóundasse (iz:2:25:26:»), 1. e. efficaciam delicti superasse, id duabus sequentibus sententiis exponitur, quas pro more suo Paulus isto abundavit quasi praeparare voluit. Superfluac autem essent illae sententiae, si in nostra abundantiam efficientiae doni iam demonstrasset. Ceterum aoristi 2z:0xvzv et 2 Exspisaeuozv v (mortui sunt, aóundavit) delicti et doni effectus non posse non evenire indicant; tam certa quippe prioris ac maxime alterius (puto magis) est efficientia, ut utriusque fructus omnes, quamvis futuri sint, velut iam productos considerare liceat. Postquam autem causas ipsas iuxta suam naturam actionemque inter se differre ostendit, Paulus effectus quoque ita esse diversos docet, ut donum longe praevaleat : 16. e non sicut per unum peccatum , (ita et) donum (vel secundum graecam lectionem consuetam : xai c7 o & &ve; Xpxpráoxecg 7b 20pnux : et non sicut per unum peccantem donum cfr VV. LL.); nam iudicium (zs vgtya) quidem ez uno (i5 &v4;) in condemnationem (si; «azxzgu.z), gratia (zs yápirpa i. q. donum v. 15) autem er multis delictis in. iustificationem (eig &xatoyx). Duorum membrorum eam esse inter se rationem, ut prius altero explicetur (coniunctio yap nam ergo sit explicativa), probatio vero non nisi v. 17. sequatur, cum Thom. plerique recte tenent. Similiter in eorum sensu generatim definiendo fere omnes consentiunt, quum significari censeant, donum ideo delicto praevalere, quia homines « non solum a peccato, quod ex Adamo contraxerunt, et a ruina, in quam illo cadente prolapsi sunt, liberaverit, sed a multis aliis quoque peccatis, quae propria admiserunt voluntate, et a multis praecipitiis, in quae ipsimet proprio arbitrio inciderunt » (To/. cfr Chrys. Cyr. Euth. etc., Haym. Herv. Thom. etc., Cai. Est. lust. ctc., Reith. Beel. M Ev. etc.). Quoniam tamen ambo membra sunt elliptica et latina lectio a graeca differt, magna est varietas in accurata eorum expositione, aliis alia supplentibus. Prius membrum /atinum cum Thom. ita complere licet, ut de peccati donique effectibus agi appareat : « non tantus effectus, inquit Thom., sequitur per unum peccatum Adae in multis, quantus consequitur in multis per donum gratiae Christi; potentioris enim causae potentior est effectus ». Alterum deinde, quo prius explicatur, idem hac ralione exponit : « Nam iudicium quidem, i. e. divina punitio, procedit e» «no, sc. peccato primi parentis, in condemnationem, sc. omnium hominum, quia in illo peccante omnes peccaverunt; gratia autem , quae datur per Christum, procedit er multis delictis, i. e. non solum ex illo originali sed etiam ex multis actualibus, zn iustificationem , i. e. perfectam emundationem ». Quae cum 7o/. hunc in modum Beel. explanat : « Si Christus nos liberaret dumtaxat ab unico illo peccato, quo facti sumus rei per Adamum, par foret ratio gratiae per Christum partae et condemnationis, cuius causa exstitit Adam; nunc vero, quum a multis, immo ab omnibus peccatis, quae originali addidimus propria nostra voluntate, per Christi gratiam absoluti iustitia donemur, consequitur valentius esse Christi 2óczux ad salvandum. quam Adami x42z54x ad perdendum » Ex iis, qui graecam lectionem sequuntur, etiam multi prius membrum simili modo, quo Latini, complent : 254 óz «5 AV £v5; &papcfioxvzoz: 7$ Poeno Pocí» Vel £s ( « non sicut illud, quod per unum qui peccavit effectum est, donum est » vel se habet). Multo minus placet, quod alii aut ex superioribus aut ex sequentibus supplere volunt : c; à; zz mapáztopa (vel*s* xpipa, Vel 25 xa:ixpuia, vel à 0iva:o;) &V và; ápagzigayvog , CUzw xai tb &dpruá écvw (Don sicul delictum [vel iudicium, vel condemnatio, vel mors] per unum peccantem exstitit, ita et donum se habet). Satis enim arbitraria ac partim eliam erronea sunt haec supplementa , ita ut primum iure praeferatur. Unde alia non est inter latinum et graecum textum differentia , nisi quod in priore per unum peccatum , in altero per unum qui peccavit legatur. Quae differentia non est magna, siquidem participium &yapzícac, uti recte Est. monet, hic « formaliter sumendum est, i. e. in quantum peccavit »; quum ergo unus ille qui peccavit intelligatur Adam, ipsum primum peccatum indirecte significatur. Quodsi ad hanc significationem attendimus disparet etiam differentia, quae in altero membro adest; graecum enim ££ £v; non potest esse nisi masculinum, quoniam ad à' ivi; &pagzfcxvvog necessario est referendum, sicut latinum ez uno est neutrum, quia ad illud per unum peccatum refertur. Dubium vero non est, quin Apostolus suo &£ £v; unum illud unius qui peccavit (i. e. Adami) delictum maxime intelligi voluerit; id enim ex locutione opposita (ix «2AÀQv zapaxzouacov ez multis delictis) evidens est. ' Decetero graeca vocabula, quibus Apostolus differentiam effectuum describit, diligenter sunt perpendenda. Ac primum quidem «» xeiua (iudicium iuxta Vulg.) proprie idem est quod iudicis sententia, quae ubi de peccato, uti hic, agitur, damnatoria esse intelligitur (cfr 2,2. 3; 3,8; 13,2), neque ullihi in Scripturis significat actum, quo iudex sententiam pronuntiat (id quod vult God.). Tó x22: autem statim respondet «2 y3pwpa (gratia iuxta Vulg.), quo nomine hic (eodem modo 8c v. 15) ipsum redemtionis opus designari censemus, quatenus scilicet velut gratuitum caritatis divinae opus consideratur. Sententia damnatoria deinde dicitur 22 £2; (ex wno), i. e. ratione unius Adami peccantis vel potius unius peccati ab eo commissi lata; redemtio vero, quamvis statim post unum illud peccatum iam sit promissa (Gen. 3,15), facta non est nisi quo tempore delictum iam abundavit (v. 20), non unius ergo sed multorum delictorum ratione (ix z2X4àv «zpazzopázov ez multis delictis). Unde illam non ad solum illud peccatum, quod omnes ex Adamo contrahunt, pertinere, sed sese ad reliqua delicta extendere, maiorem illius ergo, quam inobedientiae Adami, esse cffec- . tum apparet. Demum sententia damnatoria, quae lata est unius qui peccaverat uniusque peccati ratione, fuit vel cessit (supplendum quippe est évévsz2, vel si mavis yivszac cedit) ei; xazáxpiua , 1. e. in condemnationem, quatenus poena mortis per iudicis sententiam annuntiata iam exseculioni est mandata; altera ex parte redemtio, quae abundante delicto facta est, cessit zi; Zuxlepa, 1. e. in tustificationem , quatenus effecit, ut iustificante gratia data remitterentur peccata; unde iterum maior doniest effectus, quia non tantum, uti CArys. monet, peccata delet sed etiam iustitiam confert. Quo sensu nomina xat&xptuiz et oaioua hic adhibeantur, non satis constat. Prius, quod raro a iunioribus scriptoribus profanis et quidem semper sensu sententiae damnatoriae adhibetur, in Scripturis autem ter tantum (hic, v. 48 et 8,1) occurrit, a plerisque explicatur senientia damnatoría ( xataxpivtw condemnare); sed id fieri nequit. Namque ipso contextu xpiu« in hunc sensum iam determinatur, Paulus autem scribere non potuit, sententiam damnatoriam factam esse sententiam damnatoriam. Si vero nonnulli significari volunt, sententiam damnatoriam, quae propter unum peccatum contra unum hominem lata sit, omnibus hominibus factam esse sententiam damnatoriam, Apostolus necessario hanc oppositionem exprimere ac scribere debuit sic xxvaxpuxa t&v noÀAGv (vel mdvtwov). Quamobrem ipsam condemnationem ezsecutioni mandatam nomine xazaxpiguavo; eo magis a Paulo designari censemus, quia haec sola significatio omnibus tribus locis convenit, in quibus illud adhibet. — Alterum (2t«atvua), quo quasi effectus actionis verbo éxaiov enuntiatae designatur, aliquoties in Scripturis significat legem iuste statutam vel praeceptum (1,32; 2,96 etc.), aliquoties recte vel iuste factum (v. 18, ubi :à *apzz:0u«vt opponitur et in v. seq. velut obedientia Christi explicatur; Apoc. 19,8 !); sed neutra ex his significationibus nostro loco congruit. Quod vero aliqui volunt, significari sententiam absolutoriam (Fritzsche etc.), id plane absonum est totoque contextu excluditur. Itaque cum antiquioribus nomen 2uatouato; hic pro ewxaiocu adhiberi existimo; revera sicut nostra in sentenlia xavzxpu«a et óuxatoux, ita v. 18 xxtdxpiga et óuaíoo« in contextu plane simili inter se opponuntur; illo ergo loco parallelo sensus vocabuli 2uawuaroc sufficienter definitur. lam simili argumento, quo v. 15, a minore ad maius concludens Paulus praecedens suum assertum probat, scilicet eo maxime donum praestare delicto, quod homines vere iustificet : 17. si enim unius delicto mors regnavit per unum, multo magis abundantiam gratiae et donationis et iustitiae accipientes (vel melius iuxta probatiorem lectionem graecam : zi c4» zipissiixs SA Jipizi 4i $a SupiXg hg Dunatz0)vm. Axg- £xvevesz : U qui abundantiam gratiae et doni iustitiae accipiunt cfr VV. LL.) £n vita regnabunt per unum Iesum Christum. De nexu huius sententiae cum praecedentibus inter commentatores non constat; haud pauci enim eam immediate cum v. 15 coniungere volunt, ut aut novo [10] 7, etc.) et ab Alexandrinis graeco plur. &ztocóva: redditur. argumento demonstretur, « multo magis gratiam in multos abundasse » (cfr Tolet.), aut v. 16. pro parenthesi habeatur. At v. 16. nec pro priore quadam probatione differentiae v. 15. enuntiatae neque pro parenthesi haberi potest, quum versui 15. parallelus alteram statuat differentiam. Cum S. TÀom. igitur modernisque nonnullis (cfr Ret. Ag. etc. — God. etc.)nostramsententiam praecedenti velut probationem accedere tenemus. Etenim Apostolus v. 16 asseruerat quidem, donum unius adduxisse iustificationem, sicut delictum unius adduxerat condemnationem; undenam vero id constaret, nondum demonstravit. Quare nunc ex eo, quod Adami inobedientia, omnibus concedentibus, regnum mortis introduxerit, primum concludit a fortiore concedendum esse, obedientiam Christi introduxisse regnum vitae (cfr ad v. 15); deinde regnum vitae in iis, qui ad illud pertinent, remissionem peccatorum veramque iustitiam supponere insinuat, unde sua sponte consequitur, donum, quod occasione multorum delictorum per Christum factum sit, i. e. redemtionem, cedere in iustificationem; quam conclusionem demum v. 18 diserte enuntiat. Similem argumentandi rationem TAÀom. indicat; licet enim minus apte incisum « aóundantiam gratiae etc. accipientes » Minorem argumenti appellet, recte tamen hoc syllogismo argumentum proponit : « Sicut condemnatio [potius : regnum] mortis procedit ex peccato primi parentis, ita regnum vitae ex gratia Christi; haec duo enim uniformiter [vel potius : sicut minus et maius] sibi correspondent; sed ad regnum vitae nullus potest pervenire nisi per iustitiam; ergo per gratiam Christi homines iustificantur ». Mortem per unum hominem unumque eius delictum regnum obtinuissc et exercuisse, Apostolus hypothetice quidem proponit, sed quia de huius hypotheseos impletione iuxta superiora nullo modo licet dubitare, in ea firmum habet argumentalionis fundamentum (cfr v. 13). Quod autem wnius delicto per unum (xà «c9. vb; «apaztopate.. A 1:3 év$;) mors regnasse dicitur, id nec tautologia est nec pleonasmus, uti opinati esse nonnulli videntur, qui ideo legere maluerunt £v &v ziprztOgaz.. 9x22 ivi; (uno delicto per unum, cfr VV. LL.). Namque repetitionem hanc, perse utique non necessariam, propter finem, quem in hac sectione prosequitur, Paulus adhibuit, ut nimirum clarius praedicata unitate auctoris regni mortis ad unitatem auctoris regni iustitiae vitaeque maiore cum vi concluderet. Id quippe eum in hac seclione (12-21) inserenda potissimum spectasse monuimus (supra p. 271. 213), ut exemplo ab omnibus concesso illustraret, quanto cum iure per unum Christum omnia iustitiae ac gloriae bona nobis obvenire dicantur. Sed eadem repetitione doctrina quoque de peccato originali, prout antea ab Apostolo exposita est, haud parum confirmatur. Quoniam enim unus et llus «nzus delictum unum asseruntur esse causa, cur mors dominium universale exercuerit, omnes ergo propter illum unum unumque illud delictum moriuntur, omnino non intelligitur, quomodo aliqui moderni acath. ( Wezss etc.) singulorum peccata actualia, quibus Adae delictum imitati sint, volut causam mortis eorum a Paulo doceri sibi persuadeant. Si enim Weiss ad errorem suum probandum monet (ad v. 16^), nexum causalem, qui occasione delicti Adami inter peccatum et mortem a Deo stabilitus sit, efficere ut omnes propter sua quisque peccata actualia moriantur, non attendit, Paulum in toto hoc loco de nexu inter peccatum in genere et mortem non loqui, sed de nexu inter mortem et unum illud unius Adami peccatum, quo hic legem mortis comminatione sanctam transgressus est, immo vero eum eiusmodi nexum universalem inter peccatum in genere et mortem diserte exclusisse (vv. 13.1*). Adami posteri cuncti dominio mortis sunt subiecti, quia in uno illo unius Adae delicto partem quandam habuerunt; recte igitur omnes propter suum quisque peccatum, et quidem propter originale ex Adamo contractum, non vero propter actuale propria voluntate commissum , mori dicuntur. Duo sententiae membra haud satis concinne sibi respondere videntur, ita ut accuratius scribi potuerit : « Si unius delicto mors regnavit per unum, multo magis unius recte facto (sc. obedientia Christi) vita regnabit per unum Iesum Christum in eos, qui abundantiam gratiae et doni iustitiae accipiunt ». Verumtamen consulto l'aulus ita locutus non est, quia aliter se habet regnum mortis (quod aoristo i£22/.:92:» [regnatit] velut finitum designatur, quia morte ac resurrectione Christi iam destrui coeptum est), aliter futurum regnum vitae. Nam mors velut lyrannus dominium ita in omnes exercet, ut invitos tamquam mancipia sibi teneat subiectos neque quisquam se ei subtrahere possit; at vitae tale non competit regnum, neque enim dominatur in iustos, acsi invitos sibi eos subiecerit, sed regnat per iustos, qui vocati gratiam voluntarii sequuntur ideoque nova vita donati in et cum Christo regno ipsi potiuntur. In regno mortis sola mors dominatur, reliqui subiecti sunt servi; in regno vitae Christus quidem, qui est vera vita, regnat, sed iusti quoque omnes utpote Domino intime uniti et cum eo unam personam mysticam constituentes vere reges sunt. Recte igitur Tolet. diversa duorum membrorum constructione ostendi monet « dignitatem et excellentiam, in quam provexit nos gratia Christi, ut ipsi nempe regnemus et simus reges ». Verum ad hanc dignitatem ii soli pervenient, gu abundantiam graliae et doni iustitiae accipiunt, quam accipere nemo potest nisi per illum unum, Iesum Christum, qui morte sua non tantum vitam et gloriam futuram, sed subsidia quoque omuia ac media, quibus ad eam pervenitur, nobis promeruit. Quae tribus nominibus in Vulg. designantur : abundantia gratiae el donationis et iustitiae; quoniam autem Apostolus procul dubio ad v. 15 respicit (7; y4pi; «29 O29 xai 5, Popsx &v yágtzt 3j 560... Xpuwco9. éxegíoseooey gratia Dei et donum, quod consistit in gratia Christi, abundavit), consuetam praeferimus graecam lectionem (cfr VV. LL.) , quacum etiam S. Iren. interpr. (c. haer. IlI. 16,8) et S. Aug. (de pecc. merit. et rem. I. 13,17; ad Hilar. epist 157 n. 13 etc.) fere consentiunt (abundantiam gratiae et iustitiae cfr B. «7» «spwazíav «ao y Aptcog xat 12s 8uxatecóvrs). Nomine gratiae igitur hic (uti v. 15) benevolentiam divinam significari censemus, ex qua tamquam ex primo fonte donum iustitiae per Dominum nobis promeritae et collatae ac simul omnia dona gloriae emanant, quae a iustitia dependent. Differentiis, quae inter delicti ac doni efficaciam eorumque effectus intercedunt, expositis (15-17), Apostolus ad similitudinem v. 12 indicatam revertitur, ut accuratiore eius explanatione unum esse iustitiae vitaeque auctorem ex concessa unitate auctoris peccati mortisque confirmet(18.19.). Nequetamen comparationem inchoatam nude resumere (t. 18) recte dicitur (cfr supra p. 275 sq.), sed in sua argumentatione progrediens eam nunc velut legitimam conclusionem (ex v. 17.) rite derivat : 18. zgitur (32x zv, quia nimirum iusti per unum Christum regnabunt, uti mors per unum Adam regnavit) sicut per unius delictum (vel minus recte : per unum delictum à' &ve; xapaztópazo;) in. omnes homines in condemnationem (cie xxzáxpusa), sic et per unius tustitiam (vel : recte factum vel : per unum recte factum & évz; &uxatdyazes in omnes homines in iustificationem vitae (ei, Suaioow Qo?z). Sententia iterum elliptica est, prius autem membrum inserto aoristo àz:£r (res cessit cfr Phil. 1,19; Luc. 21,13), alterum futuro àzo555::2« (res cedet) facile complentur. Quod si qui in utroque membro aoristum supplendum censent, haud satis attendunt, etiam in vv. 17. et 19., quibuscum nostra sententia arclissime connectitur, diversa tempora in priore et in altero membris adhiberi. Neque nobis probatur, quod alii ex v. 16 in priore supplent xetua éyívezo, in altero -» /3puspa $yévezz (vel s:v42:72:) . siquidem id minus aptum longiusque quaesitum est. Porrocum Vulg. haud pauci quoque moderni acath. (Fr. Thol. Pi. Hofm. Goeb. Lips. ec.) genetivum £vz; (à évi; «apazzogazog, 9v ivi; $uaxuwsa-s;) pro masculino habent (per «nius delictum etc.); idque recte. Neque enim tantum in tota hac sectione genetivus hoc sensu sumitur (cfr vv. 12.15.16.17.19), sed etiam non tam de causarum quam de auctorum regni mortis ct regni vitae unitate agitur, atque(quod maioris est momenti) noster v. 18 estconclusio ex praemissis v. 17. propopositis, in quibus haec auctorum unitas potissimum asseritur. Nomine Suauoaxtog (Vulg. : iustitiam) hic designari recte factum, clare iam ex eo elucet, quod zapezcoyaz: (delicto) directe opponitur, clarius autem ex eo, quod nomine 0)zaxz3; (obeditio) in v. 19. explicatur (cfr ad v. 16). Similiter ex eo quod xazáxpua (condemnatio) et Zwaloew tog (Tustificatio vitae) inter se opponuntur, legitime colligitur, xazáxeiu.x non tam nudam sententiam damnatoriam, quam condemnationem exsecutioni mandatam, ipsam ergo poenam mortis, atque etiam mortis aeternae (cfr ad v. 12), iam irrogatam significare; sicut &xaíost; tz; non est sententia absolutoria vel iustificatoria , sed collatio ipsa iustitiae, quae veram vitam praestabit aeternam. Difficultas quaedam in eo adest , quod non constet, utrum eadem an diversa extensio locutioni záv:s; (omnes) in utroque membro sit attribuenda. Dubium non est, quin in priore totum genus humanum, i. e. omnes ac singuli, qui naturali generatione ab Adam descendunt, intelligi debeant (cfr supra p. 275), atque eadem extensio in altero admittenda esset, si de sola sufficientia meritorum, quae Christus obedientia sua humano generi acquisivit, nostro in loco sermo esset. In cruce enim moriens pretium solvit ad omnes ac singulos homines redimendos plus quam sufficiens, idque seria intentione ideo solvit, ut omnes ac singuli omnium suorum peccatorum remissionem veramque iustitiam obtinerent. At de sufficientia redemtionis hic non agitur, sed de eius efficientia actuali, quae sese ad solos fideles extendit, ad eos nimirum, qui mediis, quae Christus instituit, adhibitis ex Christo renascuntur; quare altero in membro locutio z2v-:; ad eos limitari debet. Quem in sensum cum SS. Patribus ac plerisque interpretibus bene Thom. : « Intelligendum est, quod sicut omnes homines, qui nascuntur carnaliter ex Adam, incurrunt condemnationem [mortis| per eius peccatum, ita omnes, qui renascuntur spiritualiter ex Cliristo, adipiscuntur [per eiusrecte factum i. e. per obedientiam eius] iustificationem vitae. Quamvis possit dici , quod iustificatio Christi transit in iustificalionem omnium quantum ad sufficientiam, licet quantum ad efficientiam procedat in solos fideles. Ex hoc autem quod hic dicitur accipere debemus, quod sicut nullus moritur, nisi per peccatum Adae, ita nullus iustificatur, nisi per iustitiam Christi, quae quidem est per fidem ipsius (cfr supra 3,22). In eum autem crediderunt homines non solum qui sunt post eius incarnationem, sed etiam qui eius incarnationem praccesserunt; sicut nos enim credimus eum natum et passum, ita ipsi cum crediderunt nasciturum et passurum. Unde eadem est fides nostra et eorum » (cfr eliam Comment. in 1 Cor. p. 469 sq.). Ab hac communi interpretatione atque simul a vero, ni fallor, Tolet. recedit, qui locutioni záv-c; eandem in utroque membro extensionem attribuens iustificationem vitae intelligit « actionem (divinam), qua iuste a Deo propter unius (Christi) iustitiam omnes renascuntur ad vitam » in resurrectione universali, sicut « condemnatio est actio, qua iuste morti traduntur omnes propter unius (Adae) peccatum ». Quomodo vero universalis resurrectio vocari possit zustz/icatio vitae, equidem plane non video; neque magis video, quid commemoratio resurrectionis omnium, iustorum et iniustorum , in hoc contextu sibi velit, ubi de beneficiis per Christum generi humano collatis agitur; nam improbis resurrectio profecto non est beneficium. Si vero Tolet. eorum resurrectionem in argumentum gloriae Christi cedere ait, non contradicam, monendum autem censeo, Apostolum de iis, quae siói Christus meruit, non loqui, sed de eius morte nobis salutifera. Genuinam esse nostram praecedentis sententiae interpretationem ex sequente apparet, quam explicationis simul et confirmationis gratia Paulusaddit. Quodnam enim delictum (zzpiz-oya) et quodnam recte factum (Zxaioyx) quum condemnationis omnium tum iustificationis vitae fuerit causa, explicat simulque ostendit, quo cum iure de condemnatione ac de iustificatione vitam praestante loqui potuerit : 19. sicut entm per inobedientiam unius hominis peccatores (&agzuct) constituti sunt multi (ci zzzi), 2ta et per unius obeditionem iusti (26a) constituentur multi (zi «zW^zi). Itaque delictum intellexit Adae in paradiso divinum praeceptum transgredientis inoóedientiam , propter quam in eum eiusque posteros sententia mortis lata est (Gen. 3,17-19); recte factum vero intellexit mortem Christi, qui « obediens factus usque ad mortem, mortem autem crucis cam, quae in ligno facta fuerat, inobedientiam per eam, quae in ligno fuerat, obedientiam sanans » (S. [ren. c. haer. V. 16,3) sibi exaltationem, nobis reconciliationem vitamque promeruit (r. 10; 3,24 sqq.; PA. 2,8 sqq. etc.). Porro sicut Adae delictum etiam fuit nostrum delictum, ita Christi obedientia simul fuit nostra obedientia. « In primo quidem Adam, inquit S. Zren. (l. c.), Deum offendimus non facientes eius praeceptum, in secundo autem Adam Deo reconciliati sumus obedientes usque ad mortem facti ». Revera in et cum Adamo »nudti illi (3 zzX»zi), i. e. omnes qui naturali generatione ab eo descendunt, praeceptum divinum transgressi sunt (c. 12), ita ut uno illo delicto omnes vere ac proprie constituti sint peccatores , reatu culpae contracto, atque eandem, quam ille, condemnalionem mortis incurrerint. Similiter autem in et cum Christo multi ul (si 24A), i. e. omnes qui ex eo renascuntur eique per fidem ac baptisma tamquam membra capiti inseruntur, mortem crucis ex obcdientia subeunt (cfr 6,3 sqq.), ita ut uno hoc recte facto Christi omnes, qui ad cum pertinent, verc ac proprie constituantur tusti, utpote a peccatis abluti et sanctificati et iustificati (1 Cor. 6,11), atque in vita regnaturi sint per unum Iesum Christum (v. 17). Quemadmodum per unum Adam peccatum et mors, ita per unum Christum iustitia ac vita : hanc thesin Paulus inde a v. 12 explanavit ac demonstravit, sed lectoribus epistolae non satisfecisset, nisi unam, quae remanere videbatur, dubitationem removisset. Tempore enim intermedio inter Adae lapsum ac salutiferam Christi mortem Lex divinitus erat data, atque iure poterat interrogari, annon Lege regnum peccati mortisque iam sit destructum aut saltem destrui coeptum sit ; idque eo magis interrogari poterat, quia Apostolus in sua argumentatione ipse a legislatione mosaica novam periodum inchoari indicaverat (vv. 13. 14) universalitatemque regni peccati ex solo rerum statu antemosaico demonstrarat. Itaque ut thesin suam omni ex parte firmam certamque esse ostenderet, etiam explicare voluit, quaenam Legis essent in salutis oeconomia partes. Paucissimis tamen, quia de hac quaestione postea (7,7 sqq.) uberius acturus erat, docet peccatum Lege non esse deletum sed auctum, ut hac ratione virtus gratiae, quae est per Christum, clarius splendesceret.
5:20
20. Lex autem subintravit (zapetozA0sv), ut (ia) abundaret delictum (-$ zxokz:oga); ubi autem abundavit delictum (cum Fuld. etc. melius : peccatum $, &papcia), superabundavit gratia. Nomine Legis (ia textu graeco v:»:; sine artic.) hic mosaicam intelligi, ex toto contextu tam evidens est, ut unius alteriusve moderni acath. sententia, qui naturalem designari sibi persuasit (Oltramare), ab aliis merito rideatur. Minus clarum est, quid verbum za;?stoz70cv hic sibi velit; Vu/g. consuetam verbi significationem (cfr Gal. 2, &) retinens Legem subintrasse, i. e. clanculum et quasi furtive intrasse, dicit. At id parum aptum videtur, non tantum quia Lex magna cum sollemnitate et pompa in monte Sinai promulgata est, sed maxime quia Paulus hoc in loco, ubi eam sapientissimo consilio a Deo latam esse docet, eius originem quasi despicere ct contemtui exponere non potest. Quod Pel. ait eam subito intrasse, id nec verbo nec contextui congruit; neque contextui satis congruit, quod cum CArys. aliisque Graecis haud pauci explicant, eam « obiter i. e. ad tempus » intrasse (cfe To/. Lap. etc.), aut quod S. Anibros. (ad Iren. ep. 73,10) vult, eam in legis naturalis locum, quia haec non amplius observaretur, intrasse. Rectius, ni fallor, cum Est. ac plerisque modernis tenemus, Paulum suo zazgsuzz^0sv ad v. 19 (5, xaxpta... si2:70:») respexisse, ut praeter peccatum etiam Legem in mundum intrasse significaret, ac si diceret : postquam peccatum intravit, Lex insuper intravit in mundum, neque tamen ad illud delendum sed ad illud augendum. Quem enim in finem Lex ad peccatum quasi accesserit, docent verba addita : (vx zAscvásr, «9 xxpizteogx (u/ abundaret delictum). Qua in sententia particulam ivz (w/) non 2x£zzw; (de rei eventu, i. q. zta ut), id quod cum Chrys. aliisque Graecis haud pauci Latini censent (Thom. Lyr. etc., Tol. Iust!. Lap. Picon. etc., Wout. Dr. etc. — Koppe, Reiche etc.) sed certo quodam sensu ::Axó; (de rei consilio, 1. q. eo fine ul) esse sumendam, aliis ex locis paulinis abunde constat (1,7 sqq.; cfr Comment. in 1. Cor. p. 51& sq. ; Comment. in 2. Cor. et Gal. p. 88. 503 sq. etc.) et cum S. Aug. et Thom". iuniores aliqui (Est. Iust?. etc.) et moderni plurimi (Reit. Mai. Beel. Bisp. etc.) recte concedunt. Ultimus quidem finis Legis est, ut sit ad vitam (7,10) utpote paedagogus ad Christum (Gal. 3,24); occasione autem Legis, qua praecepta divina clarius innotuerunt, peccata ob vitiatam hominis concupiscentiam sunt aucta (7,11. 13; 1 Cor. 15,56 etc.), idque Deus pro sua sapientia permisit, ut homo humiliatus suam agnosceret infirmitatem gratiamque Salvatoris quaereret. « Hoc est, inquit S. Aug. (in Ps. 102 n. 15), magnum mysterium, ideo eam esse datam, ut crescente peccato humiliarentur superbi , humiliati confiterentur, confessi sanarentur;... non crudeliter hoc fecit Deus, sed consilio medicinae. Aliquando enim sibi videtur homo sanus et aegrotat; et in eo quod aegrotat et non sentit, non quaerit medicum; augetur morbus, crescit molestia, quaeritur medicus et totum sanatur ». Aptissime igitur 7Àom ?. monet, « intentionem Dei Legem dantis non terminari ad abundantiam peccatorum, sed ad humilitatem hominis, propter quam permisit abundare delicta ». Antiquiores iunioresque omnes et multi quoque moderni nomen s o«apkzsega (delictum), uti etiam 4$ &uxpzix (peccatum) in altero membro (25 2: iz^sivazr» p kuagzia ubi autem abundavit peccatum), pro singularibus collectivis habent (i. q. zx «apaz:óuaz2, zi X4ag- :íz); inter modernos autem nonnulli (cfr Reithm. Beel. Ag. etc. — God. Weiss etc.) ambo nomina eodem sensu sumenda esse existimant, quo in hac sectione semper sint adhibita, ita ut :2 zapz-epz hic quoque actualem Adae lapsum (vv. 15. 17. 18) et 1; áyapzía peccatum naturae, quod ex protoparente in eius posteros omnes transiit (v. 12), significent. Verumtamen haud me intelligere fateor, qua ratione -: zzpiz:epa Adae, i. e. actualis eius inobedientia (vv. 18. 19), actualibus peccatis tempore Legis commissis abundasse recte dicatur, quamvis non negem, omnes illos, qui tempore Legis peccarunt, etiam in et cum Adamo peccasse partemque quandam in eius inobedientia habuisse. Quamobrem in priore membro & communi interpretatione (Lex advenit, ut abundarent delicta, i. e. numero ac gravitate multum augerentur) non esse recedendum opinor, idque eo minus, quia Apostolus ipse eam videtur insinuare, ubi donum ez multis delictis in iustificationem fuisse docet (cfr ad v. 16). Aliter vero in altero membro res se habet (o5 22 &xAeivacsv 1; &yapzix ubi autem abundavit peccatum); namque non tantum nihil obstat, quominus 7, &pzxozía eodem modo, quo v. 12, illud naturae peccatum esse concedatur, quod ex Adamo una cum natura in eius posteros transfusum singulis inest proprium , verum haec explicatio omnino videtur praeferenda, quia statim in sententia finali, quae additur (iva àozsp £6astAsoszv d; Xuxpcix àv t. Oavázo ut sicut regnavit peccatum in morte), 1; &yxp-ía de peccato originali sumatur necesse est. Ac revera hoc peccatum, quod omnibus inest atque in ipsis renatis, culpae reatu per gratiam deleto, iuxta elementum suum quasi materiale, i. e. iuxta inordinatam concupiscentiam, remanet, rectissime dicitur abundare, quoties virus suum actualibus peccatis prodit manifestatque. Itaque Lege superveniente delicta (-2 zapiz:wpa sensu collect.) sunt &ucta, quando peccatum (1, &ya2:íx peccatum originale) occasione incitamentoque per Legem acceptis operatum estomnem concupiscentiam (cfr 7,8) multasque transgressiones provocavit. « Verum noli timere, iuquit Chrys. , neque enim ut maius esset supplicium, id factum est, sed ut maior appareret gratia; ideo subiicitur : uo? abundavit peccatum, superabundavit gratia. Neque dixit abundavit, sed superabundavit, quia gratia non tantum a supplicio liberavit, sed etiam peccatorum remissionem ac vitam aliaque dona praestitit;... vide. quantum inter gratiam et Legem intersit ; Lex enim augmentum damnationis (z2:20575, xa:axpícse;), gratia abundantia doni (zA:2vac92; 20g:3;) facta est ». Duo hic sunt annotanda. Sunt qui particulae z5 (ubi) consuetam suam significationem localem relinquant, atque alii quidem ludaeos designari volunt, inter quos peccatum Lege data abundaverit ac gratia deinde adveniente Christo superabundaverit (Diodor. Tars. in Caten., . Euth. etc. — God.), alii universum genus humanum vel etiam humanam naturam (Nat. Beel leith. etc. — Weiss etc.), alii humanum genus ac praesertim ludaeos (7/0. ctc.). Quae explicatio omni quidem probabilitate non caret; sed qui Paulum de tribus statibus humani generis, qui temporis ratione distinguuntur, de statu nimirum ante Legem (v. 13), de statu Legis et de statu gratiae, loqui consideraverit, particulae z5 (uó?) temporalem significationem, quamvis minus frequens sit, hic attribuere cum plerisque non dubitabit : Quo tempore peccatum virus suum plurimis, quae provocavit, delictis manifestavit, gratia adveniens superabundavit. Deinde attende vocabula cum 3z£; (super) composita non tam comparativum sensum habere, ut gratia dumtaxat magis quam peccatum abundasse dicatur, quam superlativum, ut delictorum abundantiam nullo modo ad gratiae abundantiam pertingere posse significetur. Neque enim solum Adae delictum peccatumque ab eo in posteros transmissum per gratiam deletur, sed omnia alia, quae unquam commissa sunt aut committentur, per eam deleri possunt ac delentur, dummodo ne obex ei ponatur. Quem demum finem divina sapientia in hac gratiae superabundantia concedenda habuerit, Apostolus ultimis huius sectionis verbis docet :
5:21
21. ut sicut regnavit peccatum (i, &yapzia) in mortem (cum Fuld. Amat. etc. lege : in morte à» «à 9avázo), tta et gratia regnet per tustitiam in vitam aeternam (zi; Qui» aiàvtov) per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum. Adami lapsu peccatum regnum suum fundaverat et in totum genus humanum extenderat, id quod morte manifestatur, quae tamquam poena una cum peccato (originali) in omnes transierat; Lex vero superveniens, quum efficeret, ut peccatum abundaret, illud non tantum non destruxerat, sed novis viribus peccato additis firmaverat. Dubium non est, quin 1, 3yzpzía hic ipsum originale peccatum significet; id enim quum ex toto contextu tum maxime ex nexu peccati et mortis iterum asserto apparet. Cum Graecis haud pauci verbis iv «à 0xvá:o mortem velut instrumentum quoddam describi opinantur, quo peccatum regnum suum exerceat, ita ut illis (£v zà 02vá-o i. q. à «c9 0xváz2v) alterius membri locutio ài 2uatzoiv; (per tustitiam) respondeat. « Imperatoris in loco, inquit TAeopA. (cum Chrys. Theod. etc.), est peccatum, mors vero miles est ab eo armatus ». Nescio tamen, an satis apte mors fingatur instrumentum peccati, quum e contra alibi iuxta Apostolum peccatum sit instrumentum mortis, aculeus videlicet, quo mors homines occidit regnoque suo subiicit (cfr ad 1 Cor. 15,56). Neque satis rectecum Vulg. Clem. , quae legit in mortem , antiquiores quoque acath. (LutA. Calv. etc.) graecum iv «à 0xvizo alterius membri verbis ei; 1o aioviz» (/n vitam aeternam) respondere atque finem scopumque significare volunt, quo peccati regnum tendat; namque sensum hunc, quamvis aptus sit, graeca constructio respuere videtur. Mortem igitur Apostolus hic potius velut effectum considerat, quo regnum peccati sese manifestat, ita ut eam a peccato esse inductam indirecte tantum insinuet. Ceterum mors proxime quidem intelligenda est physica ; uti in reliqua tamen pericope aeternam connotari alterum membrum docet. Porro peccati regno regnum gratiae opponitur, quae peccato abundante superabundavit; prius morte Christi destrui coeptum est, alterum eadem morte fundatum est. Accuratius autem alterum describitur indicatis quum instrumento, quo exercetur (per iustitiam), tum fine scopoque, ad quem tendit (n vitam aeternam), demum fundatore, per quem conditum est (per Iesum Christum). Nomine zustitiac donum illud divinum intelligitur, quo homo, qui filius irae Dei nascitur, in statum gratiae et adoptionis filiorum Dei translatus ex iniusto vere iustus et ex inimico amicus Dei fit, ut sit heres secundum spem vitae aeternae (cfr ad 1,17). Hoc autem donum nobis praestat gratia, i. e. virtusSpiritus S., quam Christus nobis promeruit, qui Patri morte sua nos reconciliavit gloriaeque spem, quam Adami peccato amiseramus nobis recuperavit restituitque. Hac igitur ratione Apostolus, postquam eandem recuperatae, quae amissae, salutis rationem esse comparatione inter Adamum, regni peccati mortisque auctorem, et Christum , regni iustitiae vitaeque mediatorem , instituta demonstravit, &d thesin quam in hoc capite probare voluerat, reversus pacem cum Deo futuraeque gloriae spem nobis per Iesum Christum Dominum nostrum contingere repetit (cfr vv. 1. 2. 11). seu de immunitate a peccati servitute (6,1-23). Itaque duo sunt regna, ad quorum alterutrum homines omnes per tinent, regnum peccati mortisque, quod ab Adami inobedientia initium sumsit, et regnum iustitiae ac vitae, quod Christus pro nobis moriens fundavit. Quotquot naturali generatione ab Adamo descendimus, vi originis priori sumus subiecti; quotquot autem ex Christo sumus renati, in alterum sumus translati (5,17. 21). Ipsa nostra iustificatione nos per Christi merita pacem cum Deo et consequenter spem futurae gloriae recuperare, Paulus primo iustitiae fructu descripto supra (5,1-11) ostendit; ad secundum nunc fructum transiensnos simul etiam ex regno peccati egredi et a peccati servitute liberatos in iustitiae regnum transferri iustitiaeque servos fieri docet. Neque vero eiusdem plane rationis duo illi fructus sunt, quare diverso modo de iis erat agendum. Quoniam nimirum liberae nostrae voluntatis consensus vel potius cooperatio nostra requiritur, ut in iustitiae regno, in quod gratia nos transtulit, permaneamus, Apostolus, translatione illa paucis descripta, pluribus nos exhortatur, ut peccatis renuntiantes Deo vivamus iustitiamque acceptam sanctis moribus exprimamus. Duabus autem sectionibus propositum suum exsequitur. In priore enim exponit, nos per baptismum Christo morienti ct resurgenti ita inseri, ut respectu peccati moriamur et ad vitam iustitiae resurgamus, indeque colligit, ab omni commercio cum peccato nobis esse abstinendum (06,1-14). In altera deinde nos, utpote a peccati servitute liberatos, exhortatur, ut soli iustitiae in posterum servire studeamus (6,15-23). 1. — Justificati, ulpole per baplismum Chrislo morienti inserti, mortui sunt respectu peccati (6,1-14). 6,1. TU oi
5:2
ἐσγήχαμεν est un parfait, mais équivalant à un aor., comme IT Cor. 1, 9; 11, 43; vu, 5; Me. v, 15; peut-être à cause de la ressemblance des aor, ἔθηκα et ἀφῆχα, d'autant que ἔσχομεν siwnifierait « nous avons obtenu » plutôt que « nous avons eu » (Moulton, p. 1451. Au contraire ἐστήχαμεν a naturellement son sens propre de parfait. Il n’y ἃ pas à insister sur #x{ après à: où (contre Corn. et Lips.), puisque, au lieu d'avancer une pensée nouvelle, Paul explique plutôt comment nous jouissons de la paix pi Jésus-Christ. C'est qu’il nous ἃ introduits dans la grâce que nous possédons; πρησαυγή ne signifie pas seulement qu'il nous a approchés de la grâce, mais qu'il nous ἃ fait entrer dans la faveur de Dieu. Il est douteux que τῇ πίστει 1 Soden) soit authentique; l'addition ou la soustraction de ces mots ne change rien au sens; Paul ἃ assez dit que la foi était nécessaire à la justification. χαυγώμεθα ne se rattache pas directement à la paix du v. 1, comme si le v. 3 était une parenthèse, mais ce n'est pas non plus de la grâce qu'on doit se glorifier. De l'état présent, après un regard sur la manière dont on v est parvenu, Paul passe à l'avenir; dans l'espérance de la gloire de Dieu, dernier terme de la justification, nous pouvons déjà nous gloritier. ἐπί indique le fondement de cette glorification. Puisque c’est une espérance, et l'espérance que la gloire de Dieu sera manifestée en nous (vit, 18), il n'y ἃ pas là trace de la gloire qu'on tirerait de ses œuvres. La Fe. ἃ ajouté filiorum avant Dei; fide (WW.) est plus littéral que per fidem. 3 s.) Si l'on peut se gloriticr de l'espérance de la gloire. on peut donc se glorifier aussi de tout ce qui entretient cette espérance, même des tribulations; car les tribulations procurent la patience, comme uné cause occasionnelle qui permet à la patience de s'exercer. — δοκιμή est un mot qui parait pour la première fois dans Paul : II Cor. n1, 9; van, 23 2x, 13; x, ὃ; Phil. τι, 22 (+). Le sens parait être ici : « la constatation d'une fidélité à toute épreuve ». Appuyé sur la justice de Dieu, celui qui ἃ supporté les tribulations avec constance doit se dire que Dieu le reconnait comme un bon serviteur, et cela augmente son espoir de recevoir la couronne. Il n’y a donc pas d'orgueil dans cette confiance. Sur δόχιμος et δοχίμιος, Cf. DEissmaxx, Neue Bibelstudien, 86. Dans Jac. 1, 3, on lit dans l’ordre inverse : τὸ δοχίμιον ὑμῶν τῆς πίστεως χατεργάζετχι ὑπομονήν, Dans Jacques, les fidèles, au milieu des épreuves, doivent se réjouir, assurés que la bonne qualité de leur foi leur garantit la patience; dans Paul la patience, victorieuse de l'épreuve, est reconnue de bonne qualité. La distinction est de Thomas : dicendum est autem quod probatio dupliciter potest intelligi. Uno modo secundum quod est in probato….. alio modo accipitur probatio pro probatum esse. La figure de rhétorique emplovée par Paul était nommée par les anciens climax.
5:3
Avec l'espérance chrétienne, on n’est pas exposé à la confusion qui suit les déceptions et les illusions, car on possède un gage certain, l'amour de Dieu pour nous, non pas seulement tel qu'il est en Dieu, mais tel qu'il est répandu dans nos cœurs comme une source bienfaisante, par l'Esprit-Saint qui nous est donné. L'amour que nous avons pour Dieu serait aussi un gage assuré d'espérance ([Aug.), mais ce n'est pas ce que Paul envisage ici. — κατασγύνειν est fort cmployé par les LXX, même au sens actif; cf. Ps. cxvmi (cxix), 116 : μὴ χαταισγύνῃης us ἀπὸ τῆς προσδοκίας μου. Il est dit qu'on n'est pas exposé à la confusion quand on a espéré en Dieu, Ps. xx1 (xx11), 6; χχν (xxWH, 20; Is. xxvur, 16, mais nulle part l'espérance n’est le sujet. La force du terme grec « ne déshonore pas » doil sans doute étre atténuée par l'usage des LXX. Le fidèle sait qu'il a recu l'Esprit-Saint au moment du baptême, et c'est l’effusion de l'amour de Dieu en lui.
5:5
Le plus grand nombre des mss. porte ἔτι γάρ au début de la phrase et ἔτι après ἀσθενῶν (Soden met le second entre crochets}. Il y ἃ là une tournure embarrassée, mais assez claire; les deux ἔτι se rapportent au temps où nous étions « encore » faibles. Le mot est répété pour bien fixer Ie sens qu'il avait la première fois. 11 y ἃ là néanmoins une négligence de style que B a réparée en lisant εἴ γε.. Paul oppose d'abord à l'assurance des chrétiens la faiblesse et le découragement qui ont précédé la mort du Christ, puis il rehausse la gratuité généreuse de cette mort parce que le Christ est mort pour des impies. Κατὰ καιρόν, non pas : « selon les nécessités de ce temps » (κατ᾽ ἐχεῖνον τὸν χαιρόν), mais : « au temps déterminé » par Dieu; cf. II Cor. vi, 2; Eph. 1, 10; 1 Tim. π, 6; vi, 15; Tit. 1, 3; cf. Gal. 1v, 4. Les Lalins (ane. lat. οἵ Fu.) ont traduit comme s'ils lisaient εἰς τί γάρ (D?
5:6
: Lt quid enim Christus, inlerrogation qui donne du mouvement à la phrase et un sens excellent {préféré par Corn.), mais ne peut être qu'une correction.
5:7
C'est à peine si quelqu'un consentira à mourir pour un jusie; pourtant si, peut-être aura-t-on bien (καί relève seulement le verbe qui suit) le courage de mourir pour une personne bonne; le γάρ de 7» serait très atténué. D'après cette explication, la plus naturelle, Paul, qui dicte, complète et corrige sa pensée. Mème si l’on admet qu'on meure pour une personne vertueuse, le sacrifice du Christ sera encore exceptionnel et invraisemblable en soi, puisqu'il est mort pour des pécheurs. Pour éviter ce flottement de la pensée qui a le négligé de la parole parlée, SIL. supposent une distinction entre le δίχαιος el le ἀγαθός : « qui ne consentirait pas à mourir pour le juste n'hésiterait pas à mourir pour celui qui est bon ». Lipsius, encore plus subtil, dit qu'on ne mourra pas pour le juste, qui n’est pas exposé à la colère, mais bien pour une bonne cause, l’avantage spirituel des hommes (τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ, au neutre). Mais la comparaison de Paul porte sur les hommes en général et sur ce qu'ils font d'ordinaire, sans aucune allusion à l'œuvre du salut. Si donc l'article devant ἀγαθοῦ (à l'opposition de δικαίου, sans article) prouve que ce mot est au sens neutre, il faudrait entendre que Paul écarte une objection : il est sûr que bien des hommes n'hésitent pas à mourir pour le bien public, mais ce n’est pas la question, dit Paul, il s’agit des personnes; la phrase 7P serait une parenthèse, exclue du raisonnement principal: ni Chrys. ni Théodt. n'en tiennent compte. Pourtant, dans ce sens, τάγα n'est pas assez fort, car il est certain, et non seulement probable, que nombre de gens n'hésitent pas à mourir pour le bien commun. Le mieux est donc de s'en tenir au sens proposé d'abord.
5:8
Ce qui prouve bien que Paul ne compte pas les mots, c’est qu'il revient ici à la pensée du v. 6, en ajoutant que cette mort du Christ pour des pécheurs prouve l'inour de Dieu pour nous. Cela suppose l'union de Dieu et du Christ, Dieu étant dans le Christ, se réconciliant le monde (II Cor. v, 19). Paul met en relief la charité propre à Dieu, τὴν ξχυτοῦ ἀγάπην, qui dépasse si complètement ce qu'un homme pourrait faire, et qui s'exerce envers nous, pécheurs, et pour nous. Il semble que tout ce raisonnement table sur l'utilité générale. Mourir seulement pour sauver la vie d’une personne coupable pourrait être l'acte d'un amour aveuglé par la passion, car l'existence de cette personne ne sera pas utile à la cité. Cet acte irrationnel n'entre donc pas en ligne de compte. Tout ce que peut faire un homme sensé, c'est de mourir pour un citoyen vertueux, et par conséquent utile à sa patrie. Maïs l'amour de Dicu peut se porter sur des pécheurs sans ètre aveugle, parce que le Christ en mourant pour eux leur rendra Îa justice. Cet amour est assez riche pour ne pas se préoccuper des qualités de ceux envers lesquels il s'exerce. Commendat de la Fg. rend un peu faiblement le sens de συνίστησιν; lire in nos ΙΝ ΝΥ ou erga nos, au lieu de in nobis; secundum tempus de la Fg.- Clém. est à rayer (avec WW.) comme une simple glose.
5:9
διχαιωθέντες indique ici très clairement plus qu'une déclaration de non coupable icontre SÆ.); la justice est une qualité très réclle, acquise dans le sang du Christ. Quant au salut, au futur, c'est celui qui sera définitivement acquis au jour du jugement, en échappant à la colère 111, ὅ. 8). Le pécheur était certes plus loin de la justification que le justitié ne l'est du salut. Le premier don de Dieu nous est une garantie qu’à plus forte raison, nous ayant justifiés, il nous sauvera. 10, La même pensée est reprise pour ètre développée dans le sens positif. Nous étions des ennemis. au sens passif, c’est-à-dire mal vus de Dieu, et nous avons été réconciliés par la mort du Fils de Dieu. — χατηλλάγημεν, quoique au passif, n'exclut pas l'action de l'homme qui, Paul l'a dit, s'exerce par la foi, mais en ce moment c’est l’action de Dieu qui est mise en lumière: il ne s’agit pas d'adversaires qui se réconcilient, mais de sujets auxquels le souverain accorde son pardon. À plus forte raison, avant passé de l'état d'ennemis à celui de réconciliés, recevrons-nous le salut; il s'agit encore du salut éternel, et s'il est acquis dans la vie du Christ, c'est que cette vie aura été vécue par le chrétien. 11; χαυγώμεθα doit être une correction du diflicile χαυγώμενοι, Si on préfère le participe avec les meilleures autorités, οὐ μόνον doit se rapporter à χαταλλαγέντες, « non seulement nous avons été réconciliés », et à ce titre nous pouvons compter sur le salut, mais encore nous l'attendons comme des gens qui se glorifient en Dieu, comme déjà assurés de leur salut; d’ailleurs cette glorilication s'appuie seulement sur celui par lequel nous avons été réconciliés-.« La Ve. gloriamur, καυγῶμεν (F G,; c'est sans doute une tournure plus coulante, comme χαυγώμεηα (1, et autres, suivi par les syriens. On pourrait mettre gloriantes, selon le grec.
5:12
Διὰ τοῦτο a donné lieu aux interprétations les plus subtiles. Mais il est impossible de regarder 1-11 comme la preuve de 12-21. Ce sont des considérations indépendantes. Διὰ τοῦτο est donc une simple liaison suppléant une transition plus litteraire; cf. διό, 11, 1 (Lietz.). — ὥσπερ est une protase qui n’a pas d'apodose. La phrase s'est aliongée par l'insertion de 15 et 14, et ensuite Paul est si saisi par le contraste, favorable à la grâce, qu'il ne songe plus alors à terminer l'argument de parité. En signalant l'anacoluthe, Origène a indiqué une solution précise : τα et per unum hominem iustilia introivit in hunc mundum, et per tustitiam vita, et sic in omnes homines vita pertransiit, in qua omnes vivificati sunt. On conçoit que Paul ait omis ce calque retourné. ñ ἁμαρτία est ici (v-vu) le péché personnifié. D'après Prat (1, 304) : « Avec l'article, ἢ ἁμαρτία signifie toujours le péché d’origine personnifié et environné «le son cortège de maux. Sans article il indique souvent le péché en génétal». Il serait plus juste de dire que ἐδ péché est ici en fait le péché d'origine, mis qu'il signifie toujours le péché, sans distinction d’originel ou d'actuel, comme une puissance ennemie de Dieu. Le péché donc entre dans le monde, c'est-à-dire dans les consciences humaines, seules capables d'en être infectées, par le fait d'un seul homme. Paul se réfère évidemment au récit de la Genèse. S'il néglige Eve, c'est qu'Adam est le chef de l'humanité, et qu'il a dessein de l'opposer lui seul au seul Christ. La défense de Dieu était sous peine de mort. C’est donc par le péché que la mort, elle aussi, a fait son entrée dans le monde. Elle s'explique et par une loi positive et par sa transgression; la mort se répand, διῆλθεν, « comme l'héritage d'un père passe à ses enfants » (Euth.). — ἐφ᾽ ᾧ pourrait être rendu en latin par ir quo, à la condition de l’entendre comme Cajetan par ἐπ eo quod, comme Phil. ur, 12, ou comme Rom. vin, 3, ἐν & est rendu par in quo. Prat (p. 296, note) traduit le latin « parce que », « d'autant que les substantifs les plus rapprochés auxquels pourrait se rapporter le pronom relatif sont zzundus et peccatum », et il ne peut s'appliquer à aucun des deux. Mais si le traducteur latin voyait bien que ἁμαρτία est du féminin, et ne pouvait songer au monde, représentant déjà l'humanité, sans une tautologie intolérable, il a très bien pu songer à Adam, mis très en vedette au début de la phrase. Arnbrst. : in quo, id est in Adam, omnes peccaverunt, et après lui tous les Latins qui se sont rendu compte du genre féminin de ἁμαρτία. Cajetan est, semble-t-il, le premier théologien scolastique qui ait tenté d’harmoniser le latin avec le grec. Quoi qu'il en soit du latin, en grec ἐπί n’est pas synonyme de ἔπ, « dans et &' ὦ ne peut signifier « dans lequel », mais seulement « parce que Il est inutile d’insister sur ce point, reconnu par les exégètes catholiques les plus autorisés. « Nous ne faisons pas dire à Paul que tous les hommes ont péché en Adam. La formule peut être très théologique et il en donne quelque part le modèle en disant que « tous meurent en Adam »; mais enfin elle n'est pas de lui » {Prat, I, 297): tout au plus peut-on conelure omnes ir Adamo peceasse, ex paulinis verbis quasi indirecte per modum [ere sensus consequentis (Corn.). L'affirmation du Concile de Trente s'applique à la pensée de Paul dans ce verset, non au sens particulier de in quo. On peut donc entendre ce terme autrement que de fait l’entendaient les Pères du concile, qui n'ont sûrement pas adopté l’explication de Cajetan contre le torrent des écrivains ecclésiastiques. D'ailleurs le péché originel est bien contenu sous la forme : « parce que tous ont péché ». d'après l'explication fournie par l'Apôtre au v. 12. Si l'on considérait fwastoy isolément, on pourrait hésiter, car on ne saurait soutenir avec Prat (1, 296, note) que « le mot ἥμαρτον au temps historique (aoriste) semble indiquer plutôt un acte unique auquel tous ont pris part collectivement qu'une succession d'actes individuels ». Il n'y ἃ qu'à rappeler πάντες γὰρ ἥμαρτον, τι, 23, où il n'était point question de péché collectif. — En soi, ἐφ᾽ ᾧ ἥμαρτον pourrait signilier « moyennant que », « d'autant que » tous ont péché {Lietz.). Paul indiquerait que la mort, entrée dans le monde par suite du péché d'Adam, se répandait sur tous d'autant plus justement que le péché était plus général, comme il Fa dit 1, 23. Mais cela serait absolument contraire à l’argumentation des versets suivants, οἱ Lietz. reconnait que son interprétation suppose l'insertion d’une idée qui troublerait ce raisonnement. Il contient plus que l’idée de l'Apocalypse de Baruch 11v, 15 : δὲ enim Adam prior peccavit, et attulit mortem super omnes immaturam; sed etiam ii qui cr eo nati sunt unusquisque er cis pracparavit animae suae tormentum futurum : et iterum unusquisque ex cis clegit sibi gloriam futuram. L'auteur prétend donc que le péché d'Adam n'est pas chez ses descendants un péché véritable ; c’est par le péché actuel ou le mérite de chacun que se décident ses destinées immortelles. Et cependant il n'ose pas dire que la mort est le châtiment des péchés actuels. Elle ne dépend que du péché d'Adam. Paul va plus loin : Du fait d'Adam, tous ont péché : c'est l'affirmation dont la preuve suit. Nous avons dü nous expliquer déjà sur le in quo de la Fy. On serait plus près du grec en supprimant hunc avant mundum.
5:13
La preuve (γάρ) doit être cherchée dans le temps ‘qui ἃ précédé la Loi de Moïse. À ce moment il n'y avait pas de loi interdisant tel ou tel péché sous peine de mort. Paul a reconnu précédemment que, dans ce cas, le péché n’en existe pas moins, à cause de la loi naturelle, et ce péché sera parfaitement imputé et puni par Dieu au jour du jugement (1, 14-16}. Mais comme aucune loi ne disait ainsi qu'à l'Éden : « si tu commets tel acte, tu mourras », on ne peut pas conclure que la mort naturelle était la suite des péchés. C’est dans ce sens qu'il y avait des péchés dans le monde (ἁμαρτία sans arlicle)}, mais des péchés (toujours pas d'article) ne sont pas imputés comme cause de la mort, quand la condition n'est pas exprimée : si tu pèches, ta mourras. Dans Ve. au lieu de énputabatur et de essct, lire imputatur et est avec WW. conformément au grec.
5:14
Qu'est-il arrivé cependant? Que la mort (personnifiée) à régné durant toute cette époque, mème sur ceux qui n'avaient pas imité la transcression d'Adam; transgression, παράδασις, c'est-à-dire violation d'une loi formelle. Qu'en conclure? Que la mort était done toujours le châtiment du premier péché, puisqu'elle frappait mème ceux qui n'avaient pas de péchés actuels, comme les enfants. À ce point il est évident que l'humanité était pécheresse; c'est la clef de πάντες ἥμαρτον du v. 12; tous ont péché. Qu'il y ait eu des péchés dans le monde, Paul le suppose — on dirait presque ie concède — comme un fait contenu dans la Bible elle-même, mais ce n'est pas ce péché (actuel) qui était cause de la mort, puisqu'il n'était pas opposé à une loi précise, sous peine de mort. Et quant à ceux qui n'avaient pas de péché, 1 est encore plus clair que s'ils mouraient c'était pour un autre péché, qui ne peut être que celui d'Adam, dont ils étaient infectés. Paul ne dit pas vomment eut lieu cette infection; il ne développe pas l'idée d'un péché commis par l'humanité dans son chef, transmis par la génération, ete., il se contente de poser le principe. Il a choisi pour sa démonstration l'époque de l'histoire où les faits parlent le plus clairement; le moment où il ny ἃ pas de loi positive, où le péché n'est pas imputé scripturairement. Il ne parle pas de l'effet produit par la Loi; on verra plus loin qu'elle ne pouvait rien changer à cet état des choses. — L'idée qu'Adam est le type du Christ est introduite en queue de phrase, comme une base nécessaire à l’apodose qui fait défaut littérairement, mais qui est remplacée par l'a fortiori du v. 15. Le Christ était, par rapport ἀν Adam, un Adam à venir, un second premier homme. Cela est supposéiciet la théorie appartient à l’exégèse de 1 Cor. xv, 22 et 45-49. Le sens de τοῦ μέλλονsos est assez vague; on peut l'entendre : « celui qui doit venir », comme ὃ ἐργόμενος (Mt. x1, ὃ etc.).
5:16
Deuxième opposition, entre le péché de l'homme et le don de Dieu. C’est bien le péché qui est en cause, mais Paul tient à le présenter comme l'acte d'un seul pécheur, δι’ ἑνὸς ἁμαρτήσαντος... ἐξ ἑνός (masculin), quoiqu'il n'ait pas, cette fois, opposé le Christ à Adam. La phrase est elliptique suppléer ἐστί avec τὸ δώρημα, et ἐγένετο avec χρίμια. — χρίμα et χατάχριμα sont entre eux comme jugement et condamnation. Cornely donne déjà à χρίμα le sens de sententia damnatoria, et est obligé de postuler pour 22:x:::12 le sens de condamnation exécutée, comme vit, 1. Ce sens est admis par Deissmann (Neue Bibelstudien, p. 93), qui cite Hésychius, κατάκριμα" χατάχρισις, καταδίκη, et surtout plusieurs papyrus où καταχρίματα (au pluriel) lui paraît avoir le sens de « servitude légale », ou, comme je croirais, d’ « hypothèque judiciaire » à la suite d'une condamnation, ou d'amendes. κατάκριμα peut done ici signifier la peine comme prononcée. Le jugement est naturellement ce qu'exigeait la circonstance, une condamnation portant sur le péché d'un seul, et aboutissant au châtiment, tandis que le don de la grâce porte sur plusieurs péchés, celui d'Adam et les péchés personnels des hommes, οἱ aboutit à la justification. διχαίωμα, comme forme nominale, indiquerait un jugement d'absolution, mais l'opposition au v. 18 entre χατάχριμα el δικαίωσις indique plutôt le sens actif de δικαίωσις. δικαίωμα ἃ été choisi de préférence à cause de l'allitération avec les autres substantifs en -ua (Liets.). L'opposition est donc au fond entre le châtiment et la justification, ou la justice conférée ; l'explication viendra plus loin. La Fs.-Clém. est allée au péché, sans passer par l'intermédiaire du pécheur, per unum peccatum, comme s’il y avait ἁμαρτήματος; ensuite er uno (SC. peccato) au neutre. Le sens est sensiblement le même. Mais on lira avec WW. per unum peccantem, indiqué par le codex de Carafa. Quidem est rayé par W W.
5:17
Les termes de ce v. rappellent le v. 15, si bien qu'on serait tenté de prendre le v. 16 pour une parenthèse. Mais le v. 16 avait fait avancer la pensée en introduisant l'idée de justification. Le tout est maintenant repris et conduit au terme final du règne dans la vie. C’est une explication qui sert de preuve. Elle est conçue comme le v. 15, mais le parallélisme en est encore moins rigoureux. Un enchaînement mathématique eût exigé πολλῷ μᾶλλον τῷ τοῦ ἑνὸς διχαιώματι ἡ ζωὴ βασιλεύσει διὰ τοῦ ἑνὸς Χριστοῦ {Liets.), mais, suivant les vraies règles du parallélisme qui exige de la variété, Paul remplace la royauté métaphorique de la vie par le règne réel des élus. Le contraste est saisissant, des esclaves de la mort qui deviennent des rois! — διὰ τοῦ ἕνός après τῷ τοῦ ἑνὸς παραπτώματι est pour marquer plus fortement le rôle d'Adam comme cause de la mort pour tous les hommes en suite de son propre péché; c'est une nouvelle indication dans le sens du péché originel. L'abondance de la grâce répond à la grâce de Dieu du v. 15, et le don de la justice répond au don dans la grâce de Jésus du même verset. L'homme recoit celte abondance, figurée cumme une chose extérieure. SH. prenant l'image à la lettre disent que cette chose n’est pas opérée en l'homme, mais vient à lui, imputée, non infusée. Mais l'essentiel est que cette chose conçue comme extérieure en tant que don soit réclle et pénètre dans l’homme, soit reçue en lui; de même la justice, donc infusée, non imputée. C’est à la théologie d'expliquer comment cette justice ne peut exister objectivement en dehors de Dieu et en dehors de l’homme, et qu’elle naît dans l'âme par l’action de Dieu; ce n’est pas moins un don. Il va sans dire que cette justice est acquise par le sang de Jésus et la foi en Jésus. Maïs Paul renvoie la mention du Sauveur à la fin de la phrase comme étant la cause de la vie. Par lui les fidèles sont justifiés, par lui ils régneront (11 Tim. 11, 10 ss.). Le texte de J'g.-Clém. : unius delicio rend mieux le grec que in unius delicto de WW. La conformité au grec demande qu’on retranche et devant iustitiae:
5:18
On dirait d'une conclusion générale qui remonte au v. 12; cependant c'est surtout le développement du v. 16, en prenant pour point de départ non pas χρίμα, mais seulement χατάχριμα, La phrase est vive, comme les précédentes; les verbes ne sont pas exprimés. On peut sous-entendre ἐγένετο et γίνεται. ἄρα οὖν est fréquent en grec comme interrogation en tête de la phrase. Paul l'emploie à cette place sans interrogation vu, 3. 25; vi, 12; 1x, 16. 18; χιν, 12. 19; Gal. νι, 10; Eph. 11, 19; I Thess. v, 6; II Thess. n, 15, contre l'usage classique qu'il suit cependant quelquefois (vi, 21); οὖν renforce ἄρα. δι᾿ ἑνὸς παραπτώματος pourrait êlre per unum delictum, mais tout le contexte indique plutôt per unius delictum (Vg.), et il en sera de même de δι᾿ ἑνὸς διχαιώματος (Zipsius, Corn. ele.). κατάχριμα, dans ce contexte, suppose le sens de condamnation prononcée, presque de châtiment, condemnationem, quae pertinet ad poenam (Thomas); ef. v. 16. — διχαίωμα est diflicile. D'après SIL. c'est la sentence par laquelle Dieu déclare les hommes justes à cause de la mort du Christ. Dans ce cas ἑνύς s'accorderait avec δικαιώματος, « à Cause d'une seule sentence »; mais comme ces auteurs entendent de la mème facon δικαίωσις, ce serail la sentence rendue qui irait vers la sentence. Ils supposent aussi que διλαίωμα est opposé à κατάχριμα, ce qui n'est pas le cas. Et pourquoi cet unique acte d’absolution? Dès le v. 19 nous revenons à l'opposition entre Adam et le Christ. Il est donc certain que ἑνός signifie « d’un seul » qui est le Christ. Son δικαίωμα doit être quelque chose comme l’obéissance du v. 19, l'accomplissement de la justice, opposé au péché. SIT. objectent que ce sens n'existe pas ailleurs; on peut cependant citer Baruch 11, 19; Apoc. χιχ, 8 {Corn.). Dans IT Regn. xix, 254267, δικαίωμα (rendant ΠΡῸΣ) doit signifier aussi une action méritoire. Le sens normal de δικαίωμα est précepte divin; ici un précepte observé. Les justes juifs possédaient devers eux les préceptes observés comme un trésor. Sans adhérer à cette idée, Paul ἃ pu se servir du mot dans ce sens. L'action du Christ, observant toute justice, s'oppose au péché originel; tandis qu'il a entrainé le châtiment, elle conduit à la justification de la vie, c'est-à-dire qui est la vie ou plutôt qui cause la vice, ce qu’on ne peut dire de la simple sentence d’absolution. Dans les deux cas la cause posée s'étend à tous. Pour le châtiment de la mort, cela est évident, mais la justification? D'abord Paul ne prétend pas qu'elle ait un effet rétroactif sur tous les hommes déjà morts. Peut-être veut-il dire que la justice acquise par le Christ est suffisante pour sauver tous les hommes, s'ils l’acquièrent par la foi. Ou bien, s'il s'agit de l'action exercée par la justice, il faut comparer ceux qui descendent d'Adam d’un côté, et de l’autre ceux qui sont nés spirituellement dans le Christ (7/omas).
5:19
C’est dans ce verset que le parallélisme de parité est le plus exact. Il s’agit toujours de la justification par le Christ; elle n'est plus prouvée comme dans le v. précédent ex posteriori, par le règne qui en est la conséquence, mais er priori, par sa Cause : causae enim similes sunt suis effectibus : inobcdientia autem primi parentis, quae habet rationem iniustitire, constituit peccatores et iniustos : igitur obedientia Christi, quae habet rationem iustitiae, constituit iustos (Thomas). Le péché d'Adam, indiqué dès le début comme la transgression d'un pré- ‘0 La Loi est intervenue afin que la faute abonde; mais, où le cepte sous pcine de mort, est une désobéissance, παραχοή, à laquelle s'oppose l'obéissance du Christ, ὑπαχοή (sur laquelle cf. Phil. πι, 8). La notion du péché originel est de nouveau affirmée, car χαθιστάναι, « instituer, constituer, établir », indique plus qu'une appréciation juridique. Les anciens protestants le concédaient du péché qui n’est qu’une privation, ils eussent dû le reconnaître aussi de la justice. Le futur (κατασταθήσοντα!) ne s'entend pas du jugement dernier, comme Gal. v, 5 (contre Zips., Liets.), car Paul dans tout ce passage considère la justification comme actuelle; il s'explique parce que la source de justification qui est dans le Christ sera encore ouverte pour de nombreux fidèles en outre de ceux qui l’ont déjà reçue (οἷ, ur, 30).
5:20
νόμος, même sans article, est bien la Loi de Moïse, sans distinction de loi morale et de loi cérémonielle. παρέργεσθαι n'est pas subintrare, entrer en cachette, puisque la Loi a été donnée si solennellement; ce n’est pas non plus suivre un chemin de côté (Diodore), la Loi n'étant qu'un compartiment dans l'humanité. C’est simplement entrer pour jouer son rôle, comme un orateur (Tauc. II, 59), un joueur de flûte (Art. 538) entre momentanément en scène. La Loi a occupé la scène de Moïse à Jésus-Christ. — ἵνα ἃ été pris par Chrys. dans le sens d’une conséquence : τὸ δὲ ἵνα ἐνταῦθα οὐκ αἰτιολογίας πάλιν ἀλλ᾽ ἐχδάσεώς ἐστιν. Οὐ γὰρ διὰ τοῦτο ἐδόθη ἵνα πλεογάσῃ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐδόθη μὲν ὥστε μειῶσαι καὶ ἀνελεῖν τὸ παράπτωμα" ἐξέδη di τοὐναντίον, οὐ παρὰ τὺ» τοῦ νόμου φύσιν, ἀλλὰ παρὰ τὴν τῶν δεξαμένων ἑαήλυμίαν, De même Thomas, primo loco : primo quidem ut dicamus quod 1ÿ αὐ non ponitur causaliter, sed consecutive, — D'après Cornely, il s'agit d'un dessein de Dieu; cf. vu, 7. Dieu, en donnant la Loi, avait en vue la multiplication et l'aggravation du péché, plus nombreux puisqu'il y avait plus de préceptes, plus grave parce qu'il violait une loi positive. Cependant ecux qui admettent ce sens, Aug, Thomas (3° loco), Eslius, Cornely, ne l'entendent pas comme si Dieu s'était proposé pour but de développer le péché : le but de Dieu était d'obliger les pécheurs, connaissant mieux leur faiblesse, à demander pardon. De sorte que ces auteurs admettent la finalité, mais en dépassant les termes de Paul. — On peut noter que Dieu n'est pas ici directement en scène. La Loi est un épisode dans l'histoire de l'humanité; c'est un incident du drame, destiné à amener la péripétie. ἢ y ἃ donc bien finalité, mais la finalité dont il est ici question est inhérente à la nature de la 1.0], de toute loi. Paul ne se demande pas quel but Dicu se proposait en donnant la Loi, qui fut certainement un hienfait en elle-même, et accompagnée de lumières et de grâces. Il isole la notion de loi. Par le fait mème, une loi, en multipliant les défenses et les ordonnances, multiplie les péchés, au moins intérieurs. Il s'agit de la Loi mosaïque, maïs toute nue, considérée comme une loi prohibitive. Cela n’empêchait pas la Loi d'être utile aux individus, car elle suggérait aussi le repentir et organisait l'expiation. Toute loi en effet est donnée dans l'intérêt de ceux auxquels elle est imposée, et il est difficile de prétendre que les Israélites, surtout depuis le retour de la captivité, n'étaient pas plus agréables à Dieu que les gentils. Mais si la Loi pouvait être utile à chacun en particulier, elle avait dans l'histoire de l'humanité ce résultat — voulu par Dieu — de mettre le péché plus en relief; ἵνα ἐν τοῖς ὑπὸ νόμον πολὺ φχίνοιτο τὸ παράπτωμα... τέθειται τοίνυν ὃ νόμος ἔλεγχος οἷά τις τῆς ἁπάντων ἀσθενείας (Cvriize, Catena; Thomas, 2° loco). D'ailleurs le sujet sera traité de nouveau par Paul (chap. vu). — τὸ παράπτωμα, non plus le péché personnel d'Adam, mais le péché qui se commeltait sous l'économie de la Loi. — οὔ doit se traduire par « où », dont le sens est local, mais le domaine est dans le temps, plutôt que dans l'espace. — ἢ ἁμαρτία, le péché, comme une entité puissante. C'est d’abord le péché d'origine, mais, comme un fleuve, il se grossit de tous les péchés actuels. C’est à ce moment que la grâce a surabondé. Au lieu de subintravit, on proposerait volontiers obiter subiit (Érasme); le second dedictum (aussi dans WW.) serait avantageusement remplacé par peccatum, plus conforme au grec, et qui a des appuis dans la tradition ms. de la Vg.
5:21
Précédemment (ν΄. 17) c'était la mort qui régnait. Ici c'est le péché; il régnait dans la mort, temporelle et spirituelle, qui était son œuvre. Le péché, personnifié comme un monarque, est plus que le παράπτωμα isolé qui était opposé à l'acte sauveur du Christ; il est opposé à la grâce. La grâce règne déjà au moyen de la justice, préparant à la vie éternelle. Dans Vz. au lieu de mortem, lire morte (WW..). Toute cette péricope est donc une suite d’anthèses. Deux acteurs, Adam et le Christ. Le péché actuel d'Adam, τὸ παράπτωμα, et le don de la grâce, τὸ γάρισμα (v. 15), le jugement de condamnation conduisant au châtiment, le don de la grâce conduisant à la justification (v. 16). Le péché d'Adam amène le règne de la mort, le don de la justice amène le règne de ceux qui l'ont reçue (ν. 17). Un péché actuel d'un seul procure le châtiment, l'acte méritoire d'un seul procure la justification (v. 18). La désobéissance constitue des pécheurs, lobéissance fait des justes {v. 19). Le péché, grandi par les péchés actuels, règne et tue; la grâce par la justice règne et prépare la vie éternelle (20. 21). temps de J.-C., dans Revue des Sciences philos. et théol. 1911, Ὁ. 507- Le péché originel était-il un point reconnu par la théologie juive au temps de s. Paul? Le ἢ. P. Prat semble le croire .1, 306); d'autres le nient. Peut-être n'est-ce qu'une question de définition, aussi importet-il de préciser. Dans son traité du péché originel, Hurter ({Theologiae dogmaticae compendium, {, 289 ss.) établit d'abord une thèse très générale : Adam, en transgressant la loi qui lui avait été posée, n'a pas nui seulement à lui-même, mais à toute sa postérité. Cette thèse se trouve très clairement, comme on le verra, dans les Apocalypses d'Esdras et de. Baruch; mais ce n'est point encore le péché originel. Parmi les dommages causés par Adam, il y a certainement la mort, mais cette mort est-elle la peine, pour chacun, d'un péché qui s'attache à lui? La deuxième thèse résout la question : Le tort causé au genre humain par le péché d'Adam consiste en cela qu’il leur transmet non seulement la mort et les peines du corps, qu'il a cncourues, mais encore le péché; car tous naissent affectés par le péché. Cette thèse est bien celle de s. Paul, mais on ne la trouve expressément ni dans l'Icriture de l'Ancien Testament, ni dans la théologie juive ancienne, ni dans 18 littérature juive qui commence à la Michna. Le péché originel n'est pas enseigné clairement dans l'A. T. On a cité souvent Job, x1v, 4 : Quis potest facere mundum de immundo conceptum semine? Nonne tu, qui solus es? mais l'hébreu dit seulement : « Qui peut tirer le pur de l'impur? Personne. » Le grec suppose le même texte, glosé par une réllexion : « Qui sera pur, venant de l'impureté? Mais personne, quand il n'aurait vécu qu'un jour sur la terre. » On cite encore Ps. 1, 7 : ecce entm in iniquitatibus conceplus sum, et in peccatis concepit me maler net. Ce texte est plus significatif. Le psalmiste ἃ conscience d’appartenir à une génération pécheresse. Pécheur, il descend de pécheurs. Mais son intention n’est pas de regarder comme coupable l'union de ses parents, et si l'on ne presse pas sur ce point le sens littéral, il ne reste rien de clair sur l'origine de cette déchéance. On peut donc dire tout au plus de ces textes avec Hurter qu'ils sont une allusion au dogme du péché originel surtout quand on les lit à 18 lumière de la doctrine du N. T. et de la tradition (Theol. dogmaticaen compendium, 11, p. 292); et Iurter ne s’en sert pas comme d'argu: ments théologiques rigoureux. Ce qui surtont en diminue la portée, s'il s’agit de l’enseignement courant du judaïsme, c'est qu'on ne trouve rien de semblable quand il est question de la faute d'Adam. Le Siracide dit seulement : « De la femme vient le commencement du péché, c'est à cause d'elle que nous mourons tous » (Eccli. xxv, 24), et 18 Sagesse : « La mort vint dans le monde par l'envie du diable; ils en font l'expérience, ceux qui lui appartiennent » (Sap. τι, 24 s.). D'autre part, on a prétendu à tort que la Sagesse accentuait le caractère personnel du péché d'Adam : ἐξείλατο αὐτὸν ἐκ παραπτώματος ἰδίου (Sap. x, 1), comme si par ἰδίου l'auteur entendait un péché propre à Adam et non transmis (Druuwoxp, Philo... T, 204). On pourrait répondre que ἴδιος dans ce cas est simplement pour le possessif « son », comme il y en ἃ des exemples nombreux (/?/ass-Debrunner,S 286). Mais il faut plutôt entendre ἰδίου dans le sens propre. Adam fut tiré de sa propre chute, rapamrwuaxros ἰδίου, de sa faute personnelle, par la faveur de Dieu, mais les conséquences générales demeurèrent, comme on le voit aussitôt par le meurtre d'Abel. Toutefois, si l'auteur ne nie pas la transmission du péché, 1] n’en parle pas non plus. En dehors de l’Ecriture inspirée, il y a des allusions constantes à la déchéance de la nature humaine à la suite du péché d'Adam, mais la nature de cette déchéance reste à déterminer, et le mot de péché n'est jamais prononcé. Philon dit bien (Vita Alos. 11, 147) : παντὶ γενητῷ, κἂν σπουδαῖον À, παρόσον ἦλθεν εἰς γένεσιν, συυφτυὲς τὸ ἁμαρτάνειν ἐστίν, « à tout ce qui naît, si bon qu'il soit, par ce fait même qu'il naït, il est naturel de pécher », mais c’est simplement constater la propension au péclié. Cela vient-il d'Adam ou d’une chute selon la théorie platonicienne? Philon ne le dit pas. Il y a plus, d'après lui : « L'enfant qui vient au monde ἃ, jusqu'à l’âge de sept ans, en partage une âme pure, semblable à une cire molle, qui n'a encore reçu l'empreinte ni du bien ni du mal » (Quis rer. div. haer. 294, M. I, 515). Hénoch, les TIuhilés, les Psaumes de Salomon, ne fournissent aucune lumière. C’est sculement dans les apocalypses qui ont suivi la prise de Jérusalem, que l'attention est attirée sur le péché d'Adam et sur ses suiles. IV Esdras, πὶ, 7 et ad hunc mandasti diliventiim unam tuam et praelerivit eam; ct statim instiluisté in eum morlem et ἐπ nationibus eius (ce dernier mot signifie ses générations, sa postérité). Dans cet endroit 1} n'est question que de la mort. Ensuite, à propos de la loi : ri, 5 4 non abstulisti ab eis cor malignum, ut faceret lex tua ἐπὶ οἷς fructum. * Cor enim malignum baiolans primus Adam transgressus el vietus est, sed et omnes qui ex eo nati sunt. ?? Et facta est permanens in/firmitas et ler cum corde populi ciin malionitate radicis; 35 δὲ discessit quod bonum est et mansit malisnum. — Cum corde est pour #2 corde, d'après les versions orientales. On voit ici qu'Adam avait déjà avant la chute ce mauvais penchant, qui semble lavoir entrainé à sa perte. Il demeure après lui, et lorsque Dieu donne sa loi, il n'enlève pas le mauvais penchant; le mérite de l'homme sera d'en triompher grâce à la Loi, ce sera le fruit de la Loi. Mais cette cohabitation de la Loi et du mauvais penchant dans le cœur de l'homme n'eut pas d'abord d’heureux résultats : le bien s'en alla, vaincu par le mal. Cela est dit de la période qui va de la Loi à David; ce n'est point, comme le dit le P. Prat (1, 306), le résultat immédiat du péché d'Adam, comme si le penchant au mal qui se trouvait dans Adam était devenu dès lors plus puissant, plus tyrannique. Après David, nouvelle rechute, à l’imitation du péché d'Adam : τι, 56 Et dereliquerunt qui habitabant civitatem, in omnibus facientes sicut fecit Adam et omnes generationes eius; 21 utebantur enim et ipsi cor malignum. C'est le même penchant mauvais qui persiste dans l'humanité, mais c'est le même qu'avait déja Adam avant sa faute. C'est grâce à lui qu'il y a tant de pécheurs dans le monde. D'après le texte latin, il semble que ce mauvais penchant va en s’augmentant : vu, 48 ]ncrevit enim in nos cor malum, quod nos abalienavit ab his et deduxit nos in corruptionem et itinera mortis; et en effet le développement du péché dans le monde peut accroitre les mauvaises dispositions par hérédité; mais le syriaque fait seulement allusion à la présence du mauvais penchant. Ad is peut être une erreur de lecture pour a Deo. Mais voici le texte qui parait le plus favorable au péché originel. Il faut le lire dans son contexte. Esdras s’est fait expliquer par l'ange ce qu’il advient après la mort : bonheur éternel ou perte éternelle. Considérant la situation en fait, il lui semble que les chances de damnation Femportent de beaucoup, et il se plaint de la triste situation où l’homme se trouve. Ce n’est pas qu'il s'inquiète d'être condamné pour le péché d'Adam, et se reconnaisse coupable dès sa naissance; c'est parce qu'il s'attend à ce que ses propres péchés l'entraînent à la damnation. Mais en somme, c’est la faute d'Adam s’il se trouve réduit à cette fâcheuse extrémité : vir, 5 melius erat, non dare terram Adam, ‘6 vel cum tam dedisset, coercere eum ut non peccaret. 1)1 Quid enim prodest omnibus, in praesenti vivere in tristitia et mortuos sperare punitionem ? 118 ( lu quid fecisté, Adam! Si enim tu peccasti, non est factum solius tuus casus, sed et nostrum, qui ex te advenimus. 15 Quid enim nobis prodest, si promissum est nobis inmortale tempus, nos pero mortalia opera eginus. D'après les versions orientales, casus doit signifier non pas chute, mais plutôt malheur, calamité. En admettant qu'il s'agisse de la chute d'Adam, elle n’est point commune à tous comme un péché transmis, mais comme une situation déplorable; ce n’est donc point encore le péché originel au sens strict. L'Apocalypse de Baruch ne dit pas davantage et se préoccupe même plus d'établir la responsabilité personnelle dé chacun. Le péché d'Adam a amené la mort, et la nécessité pour les hommes de reconquérir l'immortalité, avec peu de chances d'y arriver, si l'on considère l'étendue du mal en fait. La chute d'Adam obligeait Dieu à fixer le nombre de ceux qui seraient engendrés : xx, ὁ Quia quando peccuvit Adam et decreta fuit mors contra eos qui gignerentur, tunc numerata est multitudo eorum... Tous sont exposés à périr : xLvinr, ὁ’ Et respondi et dixi : o quid fecisti Adam omnibus qui à te geniti sunt! et quid dicetur Evae primae quae serpenti obaudivit! 45 quia haec tota multitudo ivit ad tormenium, neque est numerus eis quos énis devorat.… 46 ju enim olim praecepisti pulvert ut daret Adamum, et tu scis numerum eorum qué ab co geniti sunt, et quuntum peccaverunt coram te li qui fuerunt... “et de his omnibus finis eorum redarvuet eos, et lex tua quam transgressi διε... On voit que c'est tout l'opposé de l'argument de s. Paul. Tous ceux-là ont des péchés personnels. Des autres il n’est pas question. La responsabilité personnelle est encore plus marquée dans niv, © si enim Adam prior peccavit, ct attulit morte super ormnes immaturam; sed eliam élli qui ex eo nati sunt unusquisque ex eis praeparavit animae suae tormentum futurum. Cette responsabilité personnelle se concilie avec le péché originel, mais ici l'opposition est marquée entre le péché d'Adam et les péchés des autres. Si 5. Paul s'était exprimé ainsi, on ne pourrait conclure de son texte au péché originel. Dans l’allégorie des eaux noires et lumineuses, les premières eaux noires sont le péché d'Adam et ses suites LVI, 6 Quia enim cum transgressus esset, mors, quae non erat tempore eius, fuit, et luctus nominatus est, et angustlia parata est, et dolor creatus est, et labor perfectus est, et iactantia (ou plutôt la maladie, d'après Charles) coepit stabiliri, et infernus postulare ut innovarelur in sanguine, et susceplio filiorum fuit, et fervor parentum factus est, et magnitudo humanitatis humiliata est, et benisnitas elanδι... C'est bien une ère de péchés qui est inaugurée, et le péril entraine mème les anges; la concupiscence naît, trait fort intéressant. Mais on ne voit toujours pas de péché transmis; au temps d'Abraham tout s'améliore, et ainsi de suite. On dirait même que Baruch, que nous croyons postérieur à Esdras, a tenu à dissiper les doutes que faisaient naître certaines des expressions de son prédécesseur, et peutêtre à protester contre la doctrine de Paul : Liv, * non est ergo Adam causa, nisi animae suae lanlum; nos vero unusquisque fuit animae suae Adam. Ce qui est la négation du péché originel. Il n'y a donc dans toute la littérature apocalyptique aucun enseignement précis sur Adam, source du péché pour tous les hommes, leur transmeltant une nature qu'on pt dire contaminée par le péché. L'examen détaillé de la littérature rabbinique nous entrainerait trop La Michna (vers l'an 200) ne contient rien sur ce sujet. Dans la suite, on retrouve toutes sortes de spéculations sur la chute d'Adam et ses conséquences. Certains textes sont tout près de regarder le péché d'Adam comme le péché de l'humanité, et, en hébreu, l'assimilation est toute naturelle. La théologie juive se rapproche naturellement de la théologie chrétienne lorsqu'elle considère Adam comme le chef de l'humanité, et lorsqu'elle touche aux effets salutaires de la circoncision. Cependant elle n’a jamais affirmé ni enseigné que le péché d'Adam ait été transmis comme péché à sa postérité. Tout ce qu'on a cité du mauvais penchantne prouve pas l'existence dans chaque âme du péché d'origine, puisque Adam, même avant son péché, avait en lui ce mauvais penchant. Tout homme est placé entre un bon et un mauvais penchant; il choisit librement. Mais quoi qu'il en soit de la théologie rabbinique, on doit constater que la théologie juive du 1 siècle contenait ce principe : Du fait d'Adam le péché est entré dans le monde, et par le péché la mort. L'homme était donc dépourvu des privilèges dont avait joui Adam; cependant on n'avait pas déterminé — du moins à notre connaissance — si la perte de ces privilèges avait la nature d'un péché. Pour l'aflirmer, il fallait avoir une idée nette de ces privilèges, qui consistaient essentiellement dans l'amitié de Dieu, et savoir que Dieu avait résolu d'en investir tous les hommes, de telle façon que l’absence de sa grâce fût dans les fils d’\dam une véritable privation. Il fallait de plus concevoir Adam comme le chef responsable de l'humanité, constitué par Dieu dépositaire des biens surnaturels, de telle sorte que sa faute soit la faute de tous. Or ces notions de grâce, de wie divine, de Providence surnaturelle sur tous les hommes, ne furent bien connues qu'à la lumière de la Rédemption. C’est en opposition avec le Christ, source de la grâce, qu'\dam fut mieux compris comme source du péché; c'est parce que le salut de tous les hommes dépendait de la grâce du Rédempteur, que la situation des enfants morts sans baptême apparut plus lamentable. La doctrine complète du péché originel est donc une doctrine chrétienne, que l'Ancien Testament ne pouvait que suggérer dans un sens large. Était-elle commune dans l'Église primilive avant l'intervention de 5. Paul? On peut en douter, et en tout cas il n’y en a pas de trace ailleurs que chez l'apôtre. La révélation n'a été close qu'avec le Ν, Τ.: Paul a pu être chargé d'éclairer sur ce point les fidèles. Ce qui pourrait le suggérer, c'est qu'après avoir énoncé le fait, il en fournit la preuve par un véritable raisonnement (ν, 13. 14), ce qu'il ne fait pas pour les grandes lignes de la foi chrétienne, connues de tous. Peutêtre aussi pourrait-on distinguer, et attribuer en propre à Paul seulement la formule explicite qui rattache le péché, dont tous les hommes sont infectés. à Adam, en tant que type, par contraste, du Christ Sauveur. Le thème de la justification étant épuisé dans les cinq premiers chapitres, Paul n'y fera plus que des allusions. Le moment est donc venu de grouper les textes dans une vue d'ensemble et les éclairer par d'autres passages de l’apôtre où mème de l'Ancien Testament. Les explications qui suivent ont trait à la justice de Dieu, à la justification, au rôle de la foi, à l'aspect eschatologique de la justification: elles visent surtout les controverses suscitées par l'exégèse luthérienne (1).
1, — LA JUSTICE DE DIEU. La justice de Dieu qui parait dès le début de l'épitre ‘1, 17: est nettement opposée à la colère de Dieu {nir, 21). Luther a osé dire que tous les docteurs avant lui, sauf 5. Augustin, comprenaient la justice de τ, 17 comme la justice vindicative (2). En quoi il cédait à la prétention d’avoir inauguré une exégèse nouvelle sur un point important, et de montrer les conséquences de ceite exégèse pour l’affranchissement de l'âme. C'était une vue nouvelle de l'Évangile, remplaçant la crainte servile par la confiance en Dieu. En réalité, personne, — pas même Luther dans son commentaire de 1515, — n'avait songé à prendre cette justice pour la justice vindicative (3), οὐ personne qui lira le texte ne pourra méconnaïître que éustitic dans ce cas est bien plus près de miséricorde que de justice vindicative. Au temps passé, Dieu ne pouvait montrer que sa colère; depuis la mort de Jésus-Christ, il pardonne. Pourquoi done nommer justice cette nouvelle attitude de Dieu? Le. mot de justice de Dieu ne se trouve pas encore dans l'épitre aux Galatesi, S'il est en tête de l'épitre aux Romains, ce n'est pas sans que Paul en) ait pesé la valeur et l'opportunité. Tout le monde convient qu'il contient une antithèse avec la justice telle pour caractériser l'Évangile le terme de justice qui était un terme juif. Il a donc eu l'intention de s'emparer de ce qui faisait la force de ses adversaires. Toute la question est de savoir en quoi sa justice diffère de celle des Juils et si l’antithèse va jusqu'à ne laisser aucun point commun. (1) On pourra trouver dans la Revue biblique. 191%, p. 321 à 331, quelques indicalions sur les opinions récentes. (2) C'est ce qu'il affirma vers la fin de sa vie, en 1545 : « Miro certe ardore caplus frigidus circum praecordia sanguis, sed unicum vocobulum quod est cap. 1 1 iustitia Dei revelatur in illo Oderam enim vocabulam istud Lustitia Dei, quod usu οἱ consuetudine omnium doclorum doctus eram philosophice intelligere de iustitia. Μ] vocant formali sen activa, qua Deus est iustus, et peccatores iniuslosque panii. » Préface de Luther à ses œuvres, dans DENIFLE, Luther und Luthertum in der ersten Entwickelung, I, 2, Quellenbelege. (3) C'est ce que le P. Denifle à pris la peine de démontrer en citant 66 auteurs occidentaux, imprimés ou manuscrits (op. 1.).
5:1
… The text most insisted upon is 1 Cor. 15:32, which, if it were not a metaphor (cf. St. Ignatius of Antioch, Rom. 5:1), would presuppose a trial and a condemnation, and consequently an imprisonment. …
… of intercession of infinite extent and efficacy, because he has merited every grace in strict justice, but is indeed in the proper sense the sole mediator between God and men and the only way that leads to the Father (I Tim. 2:5; Io. 14:6; Mt. 11:27; Rom. 5:1; 12:24; Hebr. 10:19-25; Act. 4:12), so that any other intercession with God for men, after original sin, must be understood as subordinate to and dependent on this supreme mediation …
… In this sense one must understand St. Paul's statement that faith justifies (Rom. 1:12; 5:1; 3:28; 9:30; 10:6; Gal. 2:16; 3:24). It is the obligatory way and the first effective step toward justification: "Iustitia Dei per fidem Jesu Christi" (Rom. 3:22, 30). Not that faith …
… the divine Being in supernatural Grace (I Io. 3:1). Charity toward God will therefore be fundamentally a return of the love shown in Grace (ibid. 4:19). Thanksgiving will give its name to Christian worship (the Eucharist), its value to humility (Rom. 5:1-11), its ardor to penance (Lk. 7:47), to faith its eloquence (Ps. 115:1-10), to hope its jubilation (ibid. 47), to charity its superabundance (Mt. 5:43-48) in the longing to render …
5:2
… 14:33; II Cor. 13:11; etc.), and he who is a "son of peace" (Lk. 10:6) resembles him and belongs to him. The elect will be, in the age to come, "sons of God" (Lk. 20:36); already now they enjoy divine sonship because the ἀγάπη of God is in their hearts (Rom. 5:2b, 5; 8:14; I Jn. 3:1; 4:8, 16), and after the teaching of Jesus, εἰρήνη without ἀγάπη cannot be conceived.
… new moral legislation (Matt. 5-6); it requires a spiritual rebirth (John 3:3-8; Rom. 6, etc.; cf. Médebielle, coll. 517-25; Bonsirven, pp. 213-306). It is the same "eternal life," here below the life of Grace, the life of glory in heaven (Rom. 2:7-10; 5:2 ff., 17; 6:4, 22 f., etc.; cf. J.-M. …
I. OBJECT AND MOTIVE OF CHRISTIAN HOPE. - The principal object of Christian hope is the treasures of the incorruptible inheritance, the supreme beatitude in the eternal possession of God. Consequently Christian hope extends to all the means necessary for each person to attain that same beatitude (Rom. 5:2; 1 John 3:2). Even earthly goods can fall within the orbit of its ray, but only to the extent and in the manner in which God ordains them for our salvation. …
5:3
… which, although referring to the future (the first and the last have ἐστιν, which must have been lacking in the primitive Aramaic form), confers a right and a present certainty that, with faith and hope, transposes the afflicted one into happiness (cf. Rom. 5:3-5; Heb. 11:1). Each proposition consists of two stichs: an oxymoron, followed by an apodosis introduced by ὅτι (rather asseverative, like the Heb. hī, with the sense of γάρ) which is …
5:5
… of God, given at the moment of justification, never separated from sanctifying and habitual Grace, which makes us become adopted children of God. St. Paul says: «The c. of God has been poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, who was given to us» (Rom. 5:5) and he praises it most highly in 1 Cor. 13:1-13: «Even if I spoke the tongues of men and of angels, if I have not c., I am like a resounding bronze or a clanging cymbal... …
… The great benefit was the "diffusion in souls" of the Holy Spirit (Rom. 5:5). This, and not the "charisms," made Christians "temples of the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 3:16) and gave to all the benefit of divine filiation (Gal. 4:6; Rom. 8:14).
… XIV, pp. 543-707), and above all from the Monopanton, seu reductio omnium epistolarum beati Pauli in unam, requested by the same cardinal, which in 73 chapters logically groups together what St. Paul wrote on each virtue (for example, ch. 7 De Caritate is composed thus: Rom. 5:5; 8:28, 35-39; 13:8-10; 12:9-11; I Cor. 6:17; 8:3, 11; 10:24; 12:31; 13:1-8, 13; 14:1; 16:14, 20, 22, 24; II Cor. 6:11-13; 8:24; 11:2; Gal. 5:13-14; Eph. 5:1; Col. 3:14; I …
c) Finally the seven gifts are connected with charity, according to the saying of St. Paul in Rom. 5, 5: "The charity of God is poured forth in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who has been given to us" and who does not remain in us passively. …
… remain perpetually with them and bring to completion the work of spiritual renewal begun by him, which by special title belongs to the Holy Spirit, bearer of Grace: "Caritas Dei diffusa est in cordibus nostris per Spiritum Sanctum, qui datus est nobis" (Rom. 5:5) and with it the gift of divine filiation (Rom. 15:16). But together with the gifts, the Holy Spirit himself is also given to us, as the gift par excellence, who dwells within us: …
… Alongside these terms, which express God's dwelling as actually present in the soul, there are others that rather indicate either its coming to be (the Holy Spirit sent to us: ibid. 14:26; Gal. 4:6; given to us: Io. 7:39; 14:16; Act. 5:32; 8:18; Rom. 5:5; I Thess. 4:8; I Io. 3:24; 4:13; received as a gift: Act. 2:38; I Cor. 2:12), or our transformation, soul and body, into a temple of God (ibid. 3:16 ff.; 6:19; II Cor. 6:16).
… Whoever has Grace has charity, by which he loves God above all things; whoever instead is in sin loves a creature more than God; therefore charity "which is poured into our hearts by the Holy Spirit who has been given to us" (Rom. 5, 5), destroys sin, and sin, which is the free defective will of man, destroys charity. …
… whole complex of all the virtues (Gal. 5, 22). The faithful must consider himself as a temple of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 6, 19). To this is attributed sanctification, because through its means "the love of God is poured out" in the hearts of believers (Rom. 5, 5).
… permanent and enduring quality that affects the operative principles of the man who wishes to please God. 2) These qualities are infused by God into our hearts (II Cor. 5:5); charity comes from God and is a communication of the Holy Spirit who works in us (Rom. 5:5; Eph. 3:16-19). 3) The character of true virtues of these stable qualities infused by God into man is given by the fact that with explicit activity through them the new life is realized …
5:8
… folly, juspila, in reality the work of a transcendent wisdom (1 Cor. 1:18-25; 2:12-16, etc.), considering its capacity to reveal the malice of every revolt against God, the rigor of the punishments it calls down, the Creator's love for his creatures (Rom. 5:8-11; 8:32-39), the fitness of accepting, as a just recompense, the harassment and persecutions from which his most faithful servants cannot escape (John 15:18-21; Rom. 8:35-39; 1 …
5:9
… Mt. 26:28), since in biblical style these two expressions, even taken separately (for the traditio corporis cf. Is. 53:12; Mt. 20:28; Rom. 8:32; Gal. 1:4; 2:20; Eph. 5:25; I Tim. 2:6; Tit. 2:14; Hebr. 10:10; for the effusio sanguinis cf. Rom. 3:25; 5:9; Eph. 1:7; I Cor. 14:20; Hebr. 9:7; I Pt. 1:19; I Io. 1:7) always indicate a sacrificial immolation. …
Supernatural Gifts and Original Justice
This doctrine is founded upon the great truth that Jesus is the new Adam who repairs what the first had lost (Rom. 5, 9-21; II Cor. 5, 15-21; Eph. 1, 4-12; 4, 22-24; Col. 1, 12-22; 3, 9-10). Since this state of interior justice and holiness consists essentially in sanctifying grace, it follows that it …
5:10
… If for all of us he did not spare his Son, how will he not give us all things with him? (Rom. 8:32). In Christ we have been saved (Rom. 5:10; cf. also Eph. 2:12 ff.; 2 Cor. 5:18 ff.). …
5:12
… parents, his mercy promised the Redeemer (Gen. 3:15; v. PROTOVANGELO): it is the announcement of the new A. to come who would crush the head of sin. Under this name the Redeemer is recalled especially by St. Paul in 1 Cor. 15:20-22 and 45-49, and in Rom. 5:12-21.
In the New Testament the corporeal Assumption is customarily seen as implicitly contained in four places: in the angel's greeting (Lk. 1:28), in the texts in which St. Paul teaches the precedence of Christ in the resurrection (I Cor. 15:23) or the connection between sin and death (Rom. 5:12 etc.), and in the woman of the Apoc. …
Jesus (Rom. 6:3-6). In Rom. 5:12-21 it is affirmed that the liberation from sin worked by Jesus Christ is as real as the sin that men contract in Adam; indeed, if the sin of Adam was great and efficacious, the work of …
connected with the suppliant raised hands of Moses (Ex. 17, 8-16); original sin itself is an indication of the solidarity of all men with Adam, since in him all sinned (Rom. 5, 12).
… Death was threatened to the first parents as the penalty for the transgression of a divine precept, and since the transgression occurred, the threat had its effect (Gen. 2:17; 3:3). Thus death entered the world because of sin (Wis. 2:23-24; Jn. 8:44; Rom. 5:12; I Cor. 15:21-22; Heb. 9:27). Not that death is not natural to man, a creature complex in his bodily organism, naturally subject to corruption; but he would have been preserved from …
The whole teaching of the Old and New Testaments echoes it (Apoc. 2:7; Prov. 3:18; 11:30; etc.; Wis. 2:23 ff.; Io. 8:44; Rom. 5:12, 14; I Cor. 15:21 ff., etc.). …
… During the 2nd century, Justin at Rome, Irenaeus at Lyons and Tertullian at Carthage, starting from the Adam-Christ parallel, so strongly inculcated by St. Paul (Rom. 5:12-21), develop the analogous parallel: Eve-M. …
But above all in Rom. 5:12-19 St. Paul sets out this doctrine at length in relation to original sin and to the saving work of Jesus Christ: "As by one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, so also death …
St. Paul sets it forth (Rom. 5, 12-21), resting upon the sacred text (Genesis, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom) and revealing its exact value. …
St. Paul always taught the universality of death (Rom. 5:12-21; I Cor. 15:22; Hebr. 9:27; cf. Gen. 3:19; Eccle. 12:7; Ps. 88:49). The whole redemptive economy he illustrates is summed up in the antithesis death-life, in the succession of two aeons: …
… The first repairs in a superabundant manner the evil caused by the second, bringing the life of Grace and vanquishing sin (cf. Rom. 5, 12-21). This presupposes man's capacity to receive the communication of divine life, that is, Grace, the universal salvific will of God (cf. ibid. 3, 21-31; 8, 15; Eph. 1, 3-14), together …
De la Peyrère draws his principal argument from Rom. 5, 12-14 interpreted in a wholly arbitrary manner (for its exposition and confutation see B. Mariani, Il P. e s. Paolo: Rom. 5, 12-14, in Eustes docete, 4 [1951] pp. 126-45). The system of …
… die." Likewise after the disobedience it is read in Gen. 3:19: "You shall eat your bread by the sweat of your brow until you return to the earth... for you are dust and to dust you shall return." The same doctrine is found in Wis. 2:23-24 and in St. Paul Rom. 5:12-17, in tradition and in many conciliar definitions (Denz-U, 101, 175, 788). St. Thomas (Sum. …
… The Apostle starts from the consideration of original sin, which is transmitted from Adam to all humanity (Rom. 5:12), making it the object of God's wrath and curse (Eph. 2:3). But God in his infinite wisdom and mercy freely decrees the Redemption of the human race through his incarnate Son and carries …
… 11:32; Gal. 3:22); "all are under sin," "the whole world is debtor of punishment to God" (Rom. 3:9, 19). In this "kingdom" of his (Lk. 11:15), from the first sin, the original one, Satan makes sin spread, and the death that follows from it, over all (Rom. 5:12-14; I Tim. 2:14), and humanity is subject to his baleful influence; he has in it "strongholds and heights rising up against the knowledge of God" (II Cor. 10:4-5); the entire world lies …
… 30:18; 54:16), as are the shameless woman and her accomplices (Prov. 2:18; 7:27); there are heaped up those who forget God, sinners (ibid. 9:18; 21:16), despisers of the Law (Eccl. 41:11). It appears ever more as the "wages" of sin (cf. Rom. 2:7; 5:12, 21; 6:23), in opposition to the "life" reserved for the good (Prov. 3:18; 8:35; 9:6; 12:2; 16:21); to the f. that is below is opposed "the way of life" that leads on high (Prov. …
SIN. - Here it means the moral fall or ruin, the evil human act, indicated in the Greek of the New Testament by various other expressions: ἀμαρτία or ἀμάρτημα, that is, the act by which man turns away from the attainment of his end (Rom. 5:12; 7:7; 8:3); παράβασις or ἀνομία or παρενημία, that is, transgression of the law, which man is bound to observe (2 Pt. 2:16; Rom. 4:15; 1 Jn. 3:4); παράπταμα, that is, the state of …
… For Christianity there is a human solidarity in good and in evil: as all men have sinned in Adam, so can they rise again in Christ (Rom. 5, 12 ff.) and cooperate with Christ in the coming of the Kingdom of God in themselves and in others. …
To the first, derived from the old Adam, sin is connected, and death, which is its "wages" (Rom. 5:12-21; 6:23); the new Adam, Christ, brings remedy for this, renewing man in Baptism, immersing him in his mystery of death and resurrection (ibid. 6:1-13). But there remains in man here …
5:13
… race, because all have sinned." The apodosis is missing, well supplied by Origen: "so through one man justice entered the world and through justice life." Indeed, until the Law, there was sin in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law (Rom. 5, 13); and yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over
5:14
… The first man is also by antithesis a figure of Christ (Rom. 5:14): A. and Christ gave origin to a posterity: the first is the father of fallen humanity, Christ instead of regenerated humanity. …
… universal, which was slowly made explicit and clarified by the Fathers and the theologians, is Sacred Scripture, in which is foreshadowed the total victory of Christ and of Mary over sin and over its moral and physical consequences (cf. Gen. 3:15; Rom. 4:12; 5:14; 6:8; 1 Cor. 15:21-26, 54-57). Therefore the Pontiff holds that the moment has come to define what is so widely documented and so deeply rooted in the Christian conscience, all the …
… Thus Adam is a type of Christ (Rom. 5:14), the flood a type of Baptism (1 Pt. 3:21).
5:15
… Jesus' conception of his messianic kingdom is universalistic: he commanded the Apostles to preach the Gospel to all nations (Mt. 28:18); he is the light that enlightens every man (Jn. 1:9); he died for all (I Jn. 2:1-2, cf. 4:10; I Tim. 2:6; Heb. 2:9; II Cor. 5:14-15; Rom. 5:15-19).
5:17
… rather, in a plan of providence that was frustrated by sin, He had established that man should pass from earthly life to heavenly life without passing through dissolution: but because of sin death entered the world, with all its sorrowful consequences (Rom. 5:17). The sorrows that strike humanity are physical (bodily afflictions, from want, poverty, hunger and thirst, to the most atrocious diseases up to death) and moral (temptations, aridity, …
5:18
… This gift was merited by Christ, and is transmitted to us through his humanity (Rom. 5:18; I Cor. 1:30) operating in the Sacraments, and it configures us to him, so that one can say that we become just with his justice and that we put on Christ (cf. Gal. 3:27); but this …
5:19
In Scripture the praises of obedience are most vivid, the distinguishing mark of the Redeemer, the cause of justification, while it warns that from disobedience every evil derives (Rom. 5, 19; Phil. 2, 8; Hebr. 5, 8; Lc. 2, 49; Io. 4, 34; 5, 30 etc.).
Consequently sin can be defined as: factum vel dictum vel concupitum aliquid contra legem aeternam (St. Augustine, Contra Faustum, 20, 27: PL 42, 418). This is indeed the aspect of sin most frequently recalled in Revelation (cf. Gen. 39, 9; 13, 13; 38, 10; Ex. 33, 23; Jud. 10, 7; 19, 25; Rom. 5, 19; 2, 29; 4, 16; etc.). …
5:20
… it has found its own fulfillment (τέλος; Rom. 10:4). On the other hand, the L. is accused of having brought nothing to perfection (Hebr. 7:19); of being the provoker of God's wrath (Rom. 4:15), because it multiplies transgressions (Gal. 3:19; Rom. 5:20), awakening the moral conscience (Rom. 3:20) without offering the strength to combat sin; whence whoever lives under it is subject to the divine curse (Gal. 3:10). The L. is the …
Douay-Rheims (Challoner) · Vulgata Clementina · original Douay-Rheims (Rheims 1582), transcription by EEBO-TCP (CC0) · La Sacra Bibbia, tradotta dalla Volgata da Antonio Martini (1769-1781) (LaParola (laparola.net), Martini OSIS text, Public domain (LaParola's electronic edition marks it 'Dominio pubblico')). Public domain.