nation of Israel; he begins to meet this question from the commencement of the ninth chapter. In the preface, therefore, he speaks of his love to his countrymen, that he may not appear to say any thing from hatred; and, at the same time, kindly states the ornaments which distinguished the Jewish people; and, after this, he gently passes on to remove all the offence occasioned by their blindness. He divides the sons of Abraham into two classes, to show that not all who had descended from him, according to the flesh, ought to be reckoned among the seed for the purpose of their being made partakers of the grace of the covenant; and, on the other hand, that strangers, if ingrafted by faith, are reckoned as sons; and of this he adduces an example in Esau and Jacob. In this passage, therefore, he again directs our attention to the election of God, on which the whole business must be necessarily thought to depend. Since this election is founded on the alone mercy of God, we seek in vain for its cause in the dignity of man. Rejection is opposed to election, and though the justice of this is undoubted, yet it has no higher cause than the will of God. Towards the end of the chapter, he proves that testimony had been borne both to the calling of the gentiles and the reprobation of the Jews by the predictions of the prophets.

In the tenth chapter he again commences with testifying his love to the Jews, and then states that a vain confidence in works was the cause of their ruin. He, on the other hand, meets an objection which may be adduced from the law, by showing us to be lead by the hand of the law to the righteousness of faith. He adds, that this righteousness is promiscuously offered to all nations by the kindness of God, but is finally apprehended by those whom God has illuminated with his special grace. He states the predictions of Moses and Isaiah to show that more of the gentiles than of the Jews would attain this blessing; Isaiah openly and expressly prophesied concerning the calling of the gentiles, and Moses of the hardening of the Jews. The question, therefore, still remained, whether there was any difference between the seed of Abraham and other nations, according to God's covenant. While he is desirous to solve this question, he advises them, in the first place, not to limit the work of the Lord to the mere appearance seen by the eyes, since the elect often escape our knowledge; as Elias was formerly mistaken when he thought that religion had perished among the people of Israel, though seven thousand true worshippers still remained. But lest we should be troubled on account of

the number of unbelievers, who, as we see, hate the gospel, he in the second place asserts that the covenant of the Lord resides also in the carnal posterity of Abraham, but with such as are predestinated by the free election of the Lord. He then directs his remarks to the gentiles, to prevent them from being too fierce and haughty on account of their adoption, when they insult over the rejection of the Jews, although they surpass them in nothing but the favour of the Lord, which ought rather to be to them a subject of humility. Nor had God's favour forsaken the seed of Abraham; for the Jews are to be provoked, by the faith of the gentiles, to emulate them, so that the Lord will thus gather together all his own Israel.

The three following chapters consist of a great variety of precepts. The twelfth chapter instructs the Christian, by general precepts, how to direct his life and conversation. The thirteenth is chiefly occupied in vindicating the power of the civil magistrate. We are hence entitled to infer with certainty, that there were even then some turbulent spirits, who thought that Christian liberty could not stand firm without disturbing the power of the state. But that Paul might not appear to impose any duties on the church, except those of charity, he proves this obedience also to be contained under love. He afterwards subjoins certain precepts, not yet given, for the regulating of their conduct. In the fourteenth chapter he exhorts them to pursue a line of behaviour particularly necessary in that age. For since there were many who insisted on observing the Mosaic ritual with the most determined superstition, they could not endure any neglect of these ceremonies without taking very serious offence. Such as were confirmed in their abrogation for the purpose of destroying superstition, designedly pretended to entertain a contempt for them. Both offended from a want of moderation. For the superstitious condemned those who were opposed to them, as despisers of the divine law, who, on the other hand, very unseasonably jested at their simplicity. The apostle therefore adopts a plan of moderation suitable to both parties; for he debars the latter from indulging in pride and haughtiness, and the former from too great peevishness and moroseness. At the same time he prescribes, as the best means for Christian liberty, to confine it within the bounds of love and edification; and he consults very well for the interest of the weak, while he forbids them to attempt any thing in opposition to the voice of conscience.

The fifteenth chapter begins with the repetition of a general sentiment, as the clause of the whole dispute, that such as

are endowed with more strength should exert their vigour in confirming the weak. But since the ceremonies of Moses sowed constant dissention between the Jews and gentiles, he settles all emulation among them by removing the subject of their pride and boasting. For he teaches both Jews and gentiles that salvation consists in the alone mercy of God; and it is their duty, relying on this, to lay aside all haughtiness of spirit, and knit together by this grace, in the hope of one inheritance, mutually to embrace each other. Finally, being desirous to pass on to the commendation of his office, as an apostle, which secured no small authority to his doctrine, he embraces this opportunity for making an excuse, and begging pardon, on account of his rashness in taking upon himself, with such confidence, the office of teacher among the Romans. He induces them also to entertain some hopes of his arrival, which in the commencement he had stated that he had hitherto desired and attempted without accomplishing. He adds also the reason which at present prevents him, namely, the care of the alms raised by the churches of Macedonia and Achaia committed to his trust, for relieving the poverty of the saints in Jerusalem. The last chapter is almost entirely taken up in salutations. It is, however, interspersed with some admirable precepts, and closes with an excellent prayer.

COMMENTARY

ON

PAUL'S EPISTLE

TO THE

ROMANS.

CHAPTER I.

1 PAUL, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, 2 (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) 3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, 4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: 5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations for his name; 6 Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ: 7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: grace to you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul-I should be disposed entirely to omit mentioning the name of Paul, because the importance of

F

the subject does not require us to dwell long upon it, and nothing can be added which has not been repeatedly stated by other interpreters. Since, however, I can easily satisfy one class of my readers without much fatiguing the rest, this question shall be discussed in a few words. Luke himself (Acts xiii. 7, 9) confutes the opinion of those, who suppose the Apostle to have assumed this name as a trophy of the subjugation of the Proconsul Sergius to Christ, for he proves that name to have been given our apostle before that period. Nor do I think it probable he was thus named on his embracing Christianity. I think this conjecture was approved by Augustine merely on account of its affording him an opportunity to pursue a train of shrewd philosophical remarks, in his discourse to show that the proud Saul had become a little disciple of Christ. There is greater probability in the opinion of Origen, who considers him to have had two names. For it is not inconsistent with the appearance of truth to suppose that the family name of Saul had been given him by his parents to mark his religion and kindred, and the surname Paul had been also added as a proof of his right to be a Roman citizen; because, indeed, they did neither wish this honour, which was highly esteemed at that time, to be concealed in their son, nor did they set so high a value upon it as to cancel the mark of his descent from Israel. Perhaps, too, he therefore used the name of Paul more frequently in his Epistles, because it was more distinguished and common among the churches to which he wrote, more highly valued in the Roman empire, and less known by his relations. For it was his duty not to neglect the avoiding of all unnecessary suspicion, dislike, and hatred, which were then attached to the Jewish name, both at Rome, and in the Provinces; and to abstain from everything, by which