Romans 2:28–3:18

"For he is not a Jew which is one outwardly." Here he attacks them as doing all things for show.

This is the true Jew, for everything which was previously done externally was but an image of what was meant to happen internally.

Since this is the circumcision recommended by Jeremiah: "Circumcise (yourselves to the Lord, and take away) the foreskins of your heart; " and even of Moses: "Circumcise, therefore, the hardness of your heart," -the Spirit which circumcises the heart will proceed from Him who prescribed the letter also which clips the flesh; and "the Jew which is one inwardly" will be a subject of the self-same God as he also is who is "a Jew outwardly; " because the apostle would have preferred not to have mentioned a Jew at all, unless he were a servant of the God of the Jews.

On exactly the same principle, they consider the special soil of Judµa to be that very holy land, which ought rather to be interpreted of the Lord's flesh, which, in all those who put on Christ, is thenceforward the holy land; holy indeed by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, truly flowing with milk and honey by the sweetness of His assurance, truly Judµan by reason of the friendship of God. For "he is not a Jew which is one outwardly, but he who is one inwardly." In the same way it is that both God's temple and Jerusalem (must be understood) when it is said by Isaiah: "Awake, awake, O Jerusalem! put on the strength of thine arm; awake, as in thine earliest time," that is to say, in that innocence which preceded the fall into sin.

And so to the Law presently had to succeed the Word of God introducing the spiritual circumcision. Therefore, by means of the wide licence of those days, materials for subsequent emendations were furnished beforehand, of which materials the Lord by His Gospel, and then the apostle in the last days of the (Jewish) age, either cut off the redundancies or regulated the disorders.

Thus, he rebukes not circumcision (which he apparently respects), but the one who insults or transgresses it. Then, having proved this, he clearly defines who is a true Jew, and gives to understand that the Jews did everything out of vainglory. "For he is not a Jew," he says, "who is one outwardly, but he who is one inwardly," who does nothing in a merely sensory manner, but understands spiritually both the sabbaths, and the sacrifices, and the purifications.

Then when he says for he is not a Jew who is so outwardly, he assigns the reason for his statements. First, he gives the reason; second, he proves it, at whose praise.

In regard to the first he does two things: first, he assigns the reason why circumcision or Judaism without observance of the law is fruitless; second, why observance of the law without Judaism and circumcision has value, at but he who is one inwardly.

He says, therefore, that circumcision in one who breaks the law is uncircumcision and will be judged by the uncircumcised who obey the law, for he is not a real Jew, who is so outwardly, according to carnal birth: for all are not Israelites that are of the circumcision, but they who are the children of the promise (Rom 9:6, 8). Similarly, true circumcision is not that which appears in the flesh, for it is a sign: it shall be a sign of the covenant between you and me (Gen 17:11). But it is not a true sign, unless the reality signified corresponds to it. Hence, if a Jew transgressed the covenant, his circumcision would not be true; consequently, it would be regarded as uncircumcision.

It is clear why Paul denies that the circumcision of the flesh has any merit with God. For Abraham was not justified because he was circumcised; rather, he was justified because he believed, and afterward he was circumcised. It is the circumcision of the heart which is praiseworthy before God. To circumcise the heart means to cut out error and recognize the Creator. And because the circumcision of the heart was to come in the future, first Moses said: "Circumcise the hardness of your heart," and Jeremiah also: "Circumcise the foreskin of your heart." He said this to Jews who were following idols. For there is a veil over the heart which the one who is converted to God circumcises, because faith removes the cloud of error and grants those who are perfect knowledge of God in the mystery of the Trinity, which was unknown in earlier times. The praise of this circumcision is from God but is hidden to men, for it is the merit of the heart which God looks for, not that of the flesh. But the praise of the Jews is from men, for they glory in the circumcision of the flesh, which comes from their ancestors.

This means that the law should be understood according to the Spirit, and not according to what the letter says. This pertains especially to those who have interpreted circumcision more according to the flesh than according to the Spirit.

He impoverishes himself, in order that he may never overlook a brother who has been brought into affliction, through the perfection that is in love, especially if he know that he will bear want himself easier than his brother. He considers, accordingly, the other's pain his own grief; and if, by contributing from his own indigence in order to do good, he suffer any hardship, he does not fret at this, but augments his beneficence still more. For he possesses in its sincerity the faith which is exercised in reference to the affairs of life, and praises the Gospel in practice and contemplation. And, in truth, he wins his praise "not from men, but from God," by the performance of what the Lord has taught.

The apostle testifies without any hesitation that those who walk according to the teaching of Christ—in the spirit, not in the letter—are the Israel of God.

"But he is a Jew which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter." By saying this he sets aside all things bodily. For the circumcision is outwardly, and the sabbaths and the sacrifices and purifications: all of which he hints in a single word, when he says, "For he is not a Jew which is one outwardly." But since much was made of the circumcision, inasmuch as even the sabbath gave way to it (John vii. 22), he has good reason for aiming more especially against it. But when he has said "in the spirit" he thereafter paves the way for the conversation of the Church, and introduces the faith. For it too is in the heart and spirit and hath its praise of God. And how cometh he not to show that the Gentile which doeth aright is not inferior to the Jew which doeth aright, but that the Gentile which doeth aright is better than the Jew which breaketh the Law? It was that he might make the victory an undoubted one. For when this is agreed upon, of necessity the circumcision of the flesh is set aside, and the need of a good life is everywhere demonstrated. For the Greek is saved without these, but the Jew with these is yet punished, Judaism stands by doing nothing. And by Greek he again means not the idolatrous Greek, but the religous and virtuous, and free from all legal observances.

We must realize that in some people these two things go together while in others they do not. For there are some things which have their beginning inside a man and which proceed from there to the outside, but there are other things which start on the outside and work their way inside. What I mean is this. If chastity begins inside a man, there is no doubt that it will manifest itself on the outside of him as well. For it is hardly possible if someone does not commit adultery in his heart that he should do so in his body. But it does not follow from this that if chastity starts as an outward observance that it will necessarily penetrate to the point of inner continence, so that if someone does not commit adultery in his body it will follow immediately that he does not do so in his heart either. Therefore the circumcision of the inner and the outer man must be understood allegorically as meaning that the inner man should not lust in his heart, nor should the outer man surrender to lust in his body, so that he whom the apostle says is no longer in the flesh but in the Spirit, and who mortifies the deeds of the flesh by the Spirit, may be said to be circumcised in the flesh as well.It is true that he who has been circumcised has given up a part of his flesh to perdition and kept a part of it unharmed. The part that is lost is, I think, what is referred to in the following text: "All flesh is grass, and all its glory is as the flower of the field." But the flesh which is retained is, I think, a type of that flesh of which it is said: "All flesh shall see the salvation of God." It is the task of those ears which can hear to determine which is which.

This is foretold in the law: "And the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the Lord your God," and again: "Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and remove the foreskin of your heart," not according to the letter of the law but according to the New Testament, which examines the inner secrets which only God can see.

Now it is quite within the purpose of the God of the law that circumcision should be that of the heart, not in the flesh; in the spirit, and not in the letter. Since this is the circumcision recommended by Jeremiah: "Circumcise (yourselves to the Lord, and take away) the foreskins of your heart; " and even of Moses: "Circumcise, therefore, the hardness of your heart," -the Spirit which circumcises the heart will proceed from Him who prescribed the letter also which clips the flesh; and "the Jew which is one inwardly" will be a subject of the self-same God as he also is who is "a Jew outwardly; " because the apostle would have preferred not to have mentioned a Jew at all, unless he were a servant of the God of the Jews.

"Spiritual" here does not refer to the Holy Spirit. For Paul is not talking about those who have been put right by grace but is referring above all to those outside the faith who do the works of the law and who show themselves to be better than those transgressors who are under the law.

When he says: "circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit," he paves the way for the Christian way of life and shows the necessity of faith; for believing with the heart and spirit has praise from God, who searches the hearts and judges nothing according to the flesh. From all this it follows that everywhere a righteous life is needed. By the name of the uncircumcised or gentile he means, as was said above, not an idolater, but a pious and virtuous person who does not, however, observe Jewish rites.

Then when he says but he who is one inwardly, he assigns the reason why the uncircumcision of one who keeps the law is regarded as circumcision and will judge bodily circumcision. The reason is that he is truly a Jew who is one inwardly, i.e., whose heart is possessed by the precepts of the law, which the Jews professed: your Father who sees in secret will repay you (Matt 6:6).

Again, true circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, i.e., made by one's spirit, which expels superfluous thoughts from the heart. Or in the spirit, i.e., effected by a spiritual understanding of the law, and not in the letter: for we are the true circumcision who worship God in spirit (Phil 3:3).

Then when he says whose praise he proves this reason.

For it is obvious that in all matters the divine judgment must prevail over the human. Now things that appear outwardly, such as Judaism or circumcision, are praised by men, but things that exist within are judged according to God's judgment, because man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart (1 Sam 16:7).

Hence, inward Judaism and circumcision prevail over the outward. And this is what he says: whose praise, i.e., of inward circumcision, is not of men but of God: it is not the man who commends himself that is accepted, but the man whom the Lord commends (2 Cor 10:18).

"What advantage then hath the Jew?" Since he has set all aside, the hearing, the teaching, the name of the Jew, the circumcision, and all the other particulars by his saying that "he is not a Jew which is one outwardly, but he which is one inwardly;" he next sees an objection which starts up, and against this makes his stand. Now what is this objection? If, he means, these things are no use, what reason was there for that nation being called, and the circumcision too being given? What does he then and how does he solve it? By the same means as he did before: for as there, he told, not of their praises, but the benefits of God; nor their well doings (for to be called a Jew and to know His Will and to approve the things which are more excellent, was no well doing of their own, but came of the grace of God: and this the Prophet also says, upbraiding them; "He hath not done so to any nation, neither hath he showed His judgments unto them;" (Ps. cxlvii. 20.) and Moses again; "Ask now whether there hath been any such thing as this?" he says, "did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, and live?") (Deut. iv. 32, Deut. iv. 33), this then he does here also.

Having cast aside all the ordinances of the law with the words "what advantage is there in being a Jew," he sees an objection naturally arising and forestalls it. What is this objection? The following: if there is not the slightest benefit in those ordinances, then why, after all, was the Jewish people chosen? He resolves this objection with his characteristic wisdom. In words he agrees and says that there is great benefit to the Jew, but as proof of this he brings forward not the merits of the Jews, but the gifts of God.

After showing that Judaism, which involved receiving the law and circumcision, is not sufficient for salvation without the law's observance, through which the gentile without external Judaism and circumcision obtains the fruit of each, he now objects to his own doctrine: first, he presents the objection; second, he answers it, at much every way.

First, he objects: if what I say is so, i.e., that the true Jew and true circumcision are not something outward but inward in the heart, what advantage then has the Jew, i.e., what has been given to him more than to others? It seems to be nothing. But this is not fitting, since the Lord had said: the Lord, your God, has chosen you to be a people for his own possession (Deut 7:6). Or what is the profit of circumcision, i.e., outward? It seems from his previous teaching that there is no value. But this is not fitting, since it was imposed by God, who says: I am the Lord, your God, who teaches you unto profit (Isa 48:17).

Although Paul says that there are many things which pertain to the honor and merit of the seed of Abraham, he records only one of them openly, because it is their greatest boast: They were judged worthy to receive the law, by which they learned to distinguish right from wrong. Only after that was it possible for the value of other things to be understood. But as far as the Jews according to the flesh are concerned (that is, the unbelievers among them), Paul shows that the witness of their race is of no advantage to them. But so as not to appear to be treating them all, including the believers among them, badly, he teaches that the law is very useful to Jewish believers, because they are children of Abraham.For it was to them that the oracles of God were entrusted. It is by the merits of their ancestors that they received the law and were called God's people.… Egypt was hit by different plagues because of the wrongs which it did to them. They dined on heavenly manna; they were a terror to all nations, as Rahab the harlot bore witness. Moreover, it was to them that Christ the Savior was promised for their sanctification. Therefore Paul says that in many ways it was useful to the Jews, because they were the children of Abraham and came before the Gentiles.

When Paul says "To begin with," he does not go on to list a second or third item. He means rather that what he begins with is comprehensive of all good things. For what could be better than to believe the words of God?

"Much every way: chiefly, because that they were entrusted with the oracles of God." Do you see that, as I said above, it is not their well doings, but the benefits of God, that he everywhere counts up? And what is the word "entrusted?" It means, that they had the Law put into their hands because He held them to be of so much account that He entrusted to them oracles which came down from above. I know indeed that some take the "entrusted" not of the Jews, but of the oracles, as much as to say, the Law was believed in. But the context does not admit of this being held good. For in the first place he is saying this with a view to accuse them, and to show that, though in the enjoyment of many a blessing from above, they yet showed great ingratitude. Then, the context also makes this clear. For he goes on to say, "For what if some did not believe?" If they did not believe, how do some say, the oracles were believed in? What does he mean then? Why that God entrusted the same to them, and not that they trusted to the oracles.

Even though the oracles of God are now entrusted to the Gentiles as well, they were first entrusted to the Jews, as Paul says. Is he speaking here of the letters and the books or of the meaning and the general gist of the law? For we see many Jews who from infancy to old age never stop studying, yet they never come to a knowledge of the truth. How can it be true that they have some advantage in having been entrusted with the oracles of God first, when they do not understand "what they are saying or the things about which they are making assertions?" … It must be understood that these things are being said about Moses, the prophets and others like them, to whom the oracles of God were entrusted, because there can be no doubt that they were Jews and that they had the circumcision. It would also apply to anyone who was wise, an intelligent listener or a gifted counselor. These the Lord is said to have removed from Jerusalem because he was offended by the ungodliness of the people. … Even the apostles of Christ and Paul himself, the vessel of election, came from the Jews and from the circumcision. He had far more in every way than those whom he taught who were of the Gentiles. For the oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews.Note moreover that Paul says that the oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews, not merely the letter of the text. So it is possible for us to understand that those who read but do not understand, as well as those who read but do not believe, have had only the letter entrusted to them, of which the apostle says: "The letter kills." But the oracles of God are entrusted to those who understand and believe what Moses wrote and who believe in Christ, as the Lord said: "If you believed Moses you would believe me, for he wrote of me."5 But if the Jew has received more in receiving the letter and something more in the oracles of God, does this mean that those of the Gentiles who have come to Christ are somehow left out? Or is there some way in which they have more than the Jews? Listen to what the Lord says to the Gentile centurion who believed: "Truly I say to you, I have not found such faith even in Israel." Therefore you see that when it comes to faith, the Gentiles have much more.… When it comes to the letter, the Jews have much more in every way, but when it comes to faith, it is the Gentiles who have much more.

He did not say that the Jews greatly surpass the other nations because they carried out such and such things well, but that "to them were entrusted the oracles of God," and this is a benefaction of God, not their own superiority. What does "entrusted" mean? Given, committed to their care; God deemed the Jews worthy and therefore entrusted to them the heavenly revelations.

Then when he says much every way, he answers the objection: first, in regard to Judaism's prerogative; second, in regard to the value of circumcision, at what shall we say then? (Rom 4:1). In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows Judaism's prerogative; second, he rejects their boasting over the gentiles, at what then? Do we excel them? (Rom 3:9). In regard to the first he does three things: first, he states his position; second, he explains it, at first indeed; third, he excludes an objection, at for what if some.

First, therefore, he says: the question is raised what advantage has the Jew. The advantage is both quantitative, which is indicated when he says much, and numerical, which is indicated when he says in every way. For they have an advantage both in contemplating divine matters: in Judah God is known (Ps 76:1) and in the provision of temporal things: he has not dealt thus with any other nation (Ps 147:20). They have further advantages relating to their ancestors, to the promises, and to their offspring: to whom belongs the adoption as of children and the glory and the testament (Rom 9:4). In each of these there is no small advantage, but great and important ones, which are summed up when he says much. For man's greatest good lies in knowing God, in clinging to God, and in being instructed by God: blessed is the man whom you teach out of your law (Ps 93:12).

Then when he says first indeed, he explains his statement, saying: first indeed, i.e., the chief advantage is that the words of God were committed to them, as to his friends: I have called you friends (John 15:15). This is important, because the words of God are trustworthy: the ordinances of the Lord are true and just altogether (Ps 19:9) and pleasant: how sweet are your words to my taste (Ps 119:103) and useful for avoiding sin: I have laid up your word in my heart, that I may not sin against you (Ps 119:11).

Paul says this because it was not foreordained that believing Jews would not be thought worthy of receiving what God had promised just because the others were unbelieving, for the promise was such that the gift of grace would be given to those who believed.Therefore God is not put out because of the unbelief of the Jews and will grant eternal life to their believers, which he promised would be given to those who believed in Christ. Those who did not believe excluded themselves from consideration without doing the rest any injury. Having said this, Paul commends Jewish believers, because it was not their fault that many of their kinsmen refused to believe.

Let it be agreed, Paul says, that God is faithful and true in every case, whereas men have been judged as unfaithful and untrue, so that God by his goodness may conquer the self-righteousness of men by bestowing his own righteousness upon them.

Of the Greek: but glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good."

Nor ought it, my dearest brother, to disturb any one who is faithful and mindful of the Gospel, and retains the commands of the apostle who forewarns us; if in the last days certain persons, proud, contumacious, and enemies of God's priests, either depart from the Church or act against the Church, since both the Lord and His apostles have previously foretold that there should be such. Nor let any one wonder that the servant placed over them should be forsaken by some, when His own disciples forsook the Lord Himself, who performed such great and wonderful works, and illustrated the attributes of God the Father by the testimony of His doings. And yet He did not rebuke them when they went away, nor even severely threaten them; but rather, turning to His apostles, He said, "Will ye also go away? " manifestly observing the law whereby a man left to his own liberty, and established in his own choice, himself desires for himself either death or salvation. Nevertheless, Peter, upon whom by the same Lord the Church had been built, speaking one for all, and answering with the voice of the Church, says, "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life; and we believe, and are sure that Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God: " signifying, doubtless, and showing that those who departed from Christ perished by their own fault, yet that the Church which believes on Christ, and holds that which it has once learned, never departs from Him at all, and that those are the Church who remain in the house of God; but that, on the other hand, they are not the plantation planted by God the Father, whom we see not to be established with the stability of wheat, but blown about like chaff by the breath of the enemy scattering them, of whom John also in his epistle says, "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, no doubt they would have continued with us." Paul also warns us, when evil men perish out of the Church, not to be disturbed, nor to let our faith be lessened by the departure of the faithless. "For what," he says, "if some of them have departed from the faith? Hath their unbelief made the faith of God of none effect? God forbid! For God is true, but every man a liar."

Yet although, in these last times, evangelic rigour has not so failed in the Church of God, nor the strength of Christian virtue or faith so languished, that there is not left a portion of the priests which in no respect gives way under these ruins of things and wrecks of faith; but, bold and stedfast, they maintain the honour of the divine majesty and the priestly dignity, with full observance of fear. We remember and keep in view that, although others succumbed and yielded, Mattathias boldly vindicated God's law; that Elias, when the Jews gave way and departed from the divine religion, stood and nobly contended; that Daniel, deterred neither by the loneliness of a foreign country nor by the harassment of continual persecution, frequently and gloriously suffered martyrdoms; also that the three youths, subdued neither by their tender years nor by threats, stood up faithfully against the Babylonian fires, and conquered the victor king even in their very captivity itself. Let the number either of prevaricators or of traitors see to it, who have now begun to rise in the Church against the Church, and to corrupt as well the faith as the truth. Among very many there still remains a sincere mind and a substantial religion, and a spirit devoted to nothing but the Lord and its God. Nor does the perfidy of others press down the Christian faith into ruin, but rather stimulates and exalts it to glory, according to what the blessed Apostle Paul exhorts, and says: "For what if some of these have fallen from their faith: hath their unbelief made the faith of God of none effect? God forbid. For God is true, but every man a liar." But if every man is a liar,and God only true, what else ought we, the servants, and especially the priests, of God, to do, than forsake human errors and lies, and continue in the truth of God, keeping the Lord's precepts?

You have written also, that on my account the Church has now a portion of herself in a state of dispersion, although the whole people of the Church are collected, and united, and joined to itself in an undivided concord: they alone have remained without, who even, if they had been within, would have had to be cast out. Nor does the Lord, the protector of His people, and their guardian, suffer the wheat to be snatched from His floor; but the chaff alone can be separated from the Church, since also the apostle says, "For what if some of them have departed from the faith? shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none effect? God forbid; for God is true, but every man a liar." And the Lord also in the Gospel, when disciples forsook Him as He spoke, turning to the twelve, said, "Will ye also go away? "then Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the word of eternal life; and we believe, and are sure, that Thou art the Son of the living God." Peter speaks there, on whom the Church was to be built, teaching and showing in the name of the Church, that although a rebellious and arrogant multitude of those who will not hear and obey may depart, yet the Church does not depart from Christ; and they are the Church who are a people united to the priest, and the flock which adheres to its pastor. Whence you ought to know that the bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the bishop; and if any one be not with the bishop, that he is not in the Church, and that those flatter themselves in vain who creep in, not having peace with God's priests, and think that they communicate secretly with some; while the Church, which is Catholic and one, is not cut nor divided, but is indeed connected and bound together by the cement of priests who cohere with one another.

For the Lord chose Judas also among the apostles, and yet afterwards Judas betrayed the Lord. Yet not on that account did the faith and firmness of the apostles fail, because the traitor Judas failed from their fellowship: so also in the case in question the holiness and dignity of confessors is not forthwith diminished, because the faith of some of them is broken. The blessed Apostle Paul in his epistle speaks in this manner: "For what if some of them fall away from the faith, shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: for God is true, though every man be a liar." The greater and better part of the confessors stand firm in the strength of their faith, and in the truth of the law and discipline of the Lord; neither do they depart from the peace of the Church, who remember that they have obtained grace in the Church by the condescension of God; and by this very thing they obtain a higher praise of their faith, that they have separated from the faithlessness of those who have been associated with them in the fellowship of confession, and withdrawn from the contagion of crime. Illuminated by the true light of the Gospel, shone upon with the Lord's pure and white brightness, they are as praiseworthy in maintaining the peace of Christ, as they have been victorious in their combat with the devil.

Paulus of Obba said: It does not disturb me if any man does not assert the faith and truth of the Church, since the apostle says, "For what if some of them have fallen away from the faith? Has their unbelief made the faith of God of no effect? By no means. For God is true, but every man a liar." But if God is true, how can the truth of baptism be among the heretics, among whom God is not?

"For what if some did not believe?" And what comes next makes the same point clear. For he again adds and follows; "Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid." The word "entrusted," then, proclaims God's gift. And I would have you here also note his judgment. For again he does not bring in his accusation of them on his own part, but as it were by way of objection, as if he said, But perhaps you will say, `What then is the use of this circumcision since they used it not as was fitting, since they were trusted with the Law and were unfaithful to the trust?' And hitherto he is not a severe accuser, but as if to clear God of complaints against Him, he by this means turns the whole of the accusation round upon themselves. For why, he would say, do you complain that they did not believe? and how doth this affect God? For as for His benefit, doth the ingratitude of those benefited overturn it? Or doth it make the honor to be no honor? For this is what the words, "Shall their unfaithfulness make the faith of God without effect," amount to. "God forbid." As if one should say, I have honored such an one. And if he did not receive the honor, this gives no ground for accusing me, nor impairs my kindness, but shows his want of feeling. But Paul does not say this merely, but what is much more. That not only does their unbelief not leave the soil of complaint upon God, but even shows His honor and love of man to be the greater, in that He is seen to have bestowed honor upon one who would dishonor Him.

The oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews, as we have said above, but some of them did not believe either God or his oracles. Those who did not believe were carnal, as Paul says elsewhere: "The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him." But their faithlessness does not nullify the faithfulness of God. By God's faithfulness we understand either the faith which God had when he entrusted his oracles to them or the faith by which those who received the oracles from God believed in him. We are therefore reminded that their faithlessness has not nullified the faithfulness of God, which he has shown to us.

The faithfulness meant here is that to the promises made to Abraham, to whom it was said that "in your seed all the nations will be blessed."

God knew in advance who would obey the law and who would break it. Therefore those who did not believe were unable to stand in the way of his blessings.

Speaking thus, he outwardly defends them; but nevertheless brings forward a new accusation, proving that they did not believe the words of God, which served to their honor. But he presents this accusation not in his own person. He speaks as if to say: what benefit is it to the Jews that they received the oracles of God, when they did not believe them? It seems he resolves this objection as well, vindicating not the Jews, but God. If they did not believe, is this from God? Will their unbelief "nullify the faithfulness of God," that is, the oracles and beneficence entrusted to them? The unbelief of the Jews not only causes God no harm, but on the contrary, demonstrates His great love for mankind, because He does not deprive of His beneficence those who subsequently dishonor Him. Do you see how he accused the Jews by the very thing in which they boasted, that is, by the fact that they received the law?

Then when he says for what if some of them, he excludes an objection: first, he presents it; second, he rejects it by showing its consequences, at shall their unbelief; third, by showing that the consequence is unfitting, at but God is true.

Someone could belittle the Jews' prerogative by citing their ingratitude, through which they would seem to have set aside the value of God's message. Hence he says, what if some of them have not believed? Does this show that the Jew has no advantage, especially in the light of 2 Peter: it would have been better for them never to have known the way of justice than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandments delivered to them (2 Pet 2:21)? For they did not believe the lawgiver: they had no faith in his promises (Ps 106:24) or the prophets: for you are among unbelievers and destroyers (Ezek 2:6) or the Son of God: if I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? (John 8:46).

Then when he says shall their unbelief, he excludes this objection by showing the unsuitable conclusion it engenders. For if the Jews' prerogative were taken away on account of the unbelief of some, it would follow that man's unbelief would nullify God's faithfulness—which is an unacceptable conclusion. This is what he says: shall their unbelief, namely, of those who have not believed, make the faith of God without effect? This can be understood in two ways: in one way, as referring to the faith by which one believes in God. For the faith of believers is not nullified by those who have not believed, because the evil in some members of society does not nullify the good in other members: some of them he blessed and exalted and some of them he made holy and brought near to himself; some he cursed and brought low, and he turned them out of their place (Sir 33:12). This is against those of whom Augustine says in The Letter to the People of Hippo: what other motive inspires them and what else do they discuss save that when a bishop or cleric or monk or nun falls, they believe that all are such, but not all can be exposed? In another way, it can be understood as referring to the faith with which God is faithful in keeping his promises: he who promised is faithful (Heb 10:23). This faithfulness would be nullified, if it happened that the Jews had no advantage, just because some have not believed. For God promised to multiply that people and make it great: I will multiply your descendants (Gen 22:l6).

Does God lie? Truly He lies not, because it is impossible for God to lie. And further, does this impossibility arise from infirmity? No, truly, for how can He be Almighty if He cannot do all things? What then is impossible to Him? Not that which is difficult to His Power, but what is contrary to His Nature. It is impossible, it is said, for Him to lie. This impossibility comes not of infirmity, but of Power and Majesty, for truth admits not of falsehood, nor God's Power of the weakness of error. Wherefore let God be true and every man a liar.

Because God is true, he gives what he has promised. To fail is human, for the times and the foolishness of nature make man unstable in that he does not have foreknowledge. But God, for whom there is no future, remains unchanging, as he says: "I the Lord do not change." Therefore Paul says that all men are liars, and this is true. For nature is fallible and is not unreasonably called a liar. It may be a liar intentionally or accidentally, but we must not expect God to be like that, for he is perfect and full of good will and will accomplish what he has promised. He even confirms this by the prophetic oracle: "Thou art justified in thy sentence and blameless in thy judgment."

God in himself is true; you in yourself are a liar—in him you can be true!

If every man is a liar and God alone is true, what else ought we servants and bishops of God to do except to reject human errors and lies and to remain in the truth of God, obeying the precepts of the Lord?

Even if all men loved a lie before the coming of the truth, the true God nevertheless remained just, holding fast to the things which were proper to God and fulfilling everything which was said that was fitting.

The homeless scepticism of our time has reached a sub-conscious feeling that morality is somehow merely a matter of human taste—an accident of psychology. And if goodness only exists in certain human minds, a man wishing to praise goodness will naturally exaggerate the amount of it that there is in human minds or the number of human minds in which it is supreme. Every confession that man is vicious is a confession that virtue is visionary. Every book which admits that evil is real is felt in some vague way to be admitting that good is unreal. The modern instinct is that if the heart of man is evil, there is nothing that remains good. But the older feeling was that if the heart of man was ever so evil, there was something that remained good—goodness remained good. An actual avenging virtue existed outside the human race; to that men rose, or from that men fell away.

If everyone who utters a lie has already destroyed his soul, and all of us are liars, are we all going to perish? What Scripture says … we should interpret as referring to heretics.… The doer of the deed has indeed killed his own soul, but the heretic—the liar—has killed as many souls as he has seduced.

If one is to be righteous, one must keep the law in every particular, which is almost impossible for human nature to achieve. Therefore every one is a liar. For since every man is a liar, it follows that on that day when the Lord comes to judgment with men, only he will be justified in what he says. For his words are true in everything, because they are the words of truth.It should also be understood that this saying, i.e., that every man is a liar, is taken from Psalm 116:11 … Now someone might object that if all men are liars, then Paul too, being a man, will also be a liar! But in that case David, who originally said it, would also be a liar, and what he said would be false, just because he was a liar.… The whole statement would thus become nonsense, which is absurd!

"Every man" means the majority. Paul's opponents had quoted this text as if David had meant: "For this reason have I sinned, that thou might appear just in judging me." But the true meaning is that God promised to punish sinners without showing favoritism and that some thought his delay in doing so amounted to a lie. God prevails when he judges the deeds of those from whom no one thought vengeance would ever be exacted. Or it may also mean that God has shown that he is concerned about mankind … and that he has overthrown those who wrongly suggest that he is not interested in human affairs.

Human beings are thus given over to their own free will. Hence they are divided into two groups: those who prefer the worship of God and those who take the opposite path and come to a dire end, corresponding to their choice.

Above he said that some did not believe. Yet it turns out that not just some, but all proved faithless. Therefore, so as not to grieve the Jews, he speaks wisely and presents what was shown by experience in the form of a supposition. Let us say, he says, that all were faithless. What of it? Even in this case God is justified. That is: if one considers and compares what God bestowed upon the Jews and how they conducted themselves before Him, then righteousness remains on God's side, as David also says (Ps. 50:6).

Then when he says, God forbid! But God is true, he shows that it is unfitting for God's faithfulness to be nullified on account of men's unbelief. First, he gives a reason for this; second, he cites a text, at as it is written; third, he excludes a false understanding of this text, at but if our injustice.

The reason is based on the fact that God in himself is true: the Lord is the true God (Jer 10:10); this is the true God and life eternal (1 John 5:20); and every man a liar: I said in my consternation: men are all a vain hope (Ps 116:11). Hence, it is plain that man's mendacity or unbelief in not adhering to the truth does not nullify God's truth or faithfulness.

This is easier to understand, if we consider that truth implies agreement between thing and understanding. But things are in agreement with our understanding in one way and with God's in another way. For our intellect derives its knowledge from things; consequently, the cause and measure of our truth stems from the thing's being. For an opinion is called true or false depending on whether the thing is as stated or is not. Hence, our understanding can be true or it can be false, for it can be in agreement or disagreement. But whatever is open to being or not being needs someone acting to make it be; otherwise, it continues not to be. For as air without something illuminating it remains dark, so our intellect by itself, unless it is enlightened by the first truth, continues in falseness. Hence, of himself every man is false in his intellect and is true only in virtue of participating in the divine truth: send out your light and your truth (Ps 43:3). The divine intellect, on the other hand, is the cause and measure of things. For this reason it is of itself unfailingly true, and everything else is true inasmuch as it conforms to that intellect. Similarly, considering truth on the part of the thing, man of himself does not have truth, because his nature is convertible into nothing. Only the divine nature, which is not produced from nothing or convertible into nothing, has of itself truth.

Then when he says as it is written, he proves his statement on the authority of a text in a psalm: that you may be justified in your words and may overcome when you are judged (Ps 51:4). How this is to the point can be gathered from considering what the Psalmist had said just ahead of it. For he says just before this, against you, you only, have I sinned, and then: that you may be justified in your words and may overcome when you are judged. For God through the prophet Nathan had promised David that he would establish his kingdom forever in his seed (2 Sam 7:16). But later, when he fell into serious sin, namely, adultery and murder (2 Sam 11:2ff.), some said that on account of these sins God would not keep the promises made to him.

Hence, the Psalmist's intention bears on two things. First, that God's justice, which involves keeping his promises, is not changed on account of sin. Touching on this he says, that you may be justified in your words, i.e., that you may be shown just in your words, since you do not disregard them because of my sins: all the words of my mouth are righteous (Prov 8:8); the Lord is faithful in all his words (Ps 145:13). Second, that God's promise imitates men's judgment. And this is what he says, and may overcome, namely, by keeping your promise, when you are judged, namely, by men, that on account of my sins you did not keep your promises: be not overcome by evil, but overcome evil by good (Rom 12:21), which is said to men. Accordingly, it is truer of God.

It should be noted that God's promise to David was to be fulfilled in Christ's Incarnation. Hence it was a predestinative prophecy, in which something is promised as destined to be fulfilled in every way; whereas something promised or foretold by a prophecy of warning is not predicted as destined to be fulfilled in every way but according to men's merits, which can change. Therefore, if the promise made to David had not been fulfilled, it would have been prejudicial to God's justice; whereas the non-fulfillment of a promise made through a prophecy of warning is not prejudicial to God's justice, but indicates a change in human merits. Hence it is written: if at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, and if that nation turns from its evil, I will repent of the evil that I intended to do to it (Jer 18:7). Therefore, it is plain, according to this sense, that man's sin does not exclude God's faithfulness.

Other senses of this text are presented in the Gloss, but they are not closely related to the Apostle's intention. The first is that these words are linked with the words, wash me more thoroughly from my iniquity (Ps 50:4), to the end that you may be justified, i.e., appear just, in your words, in which you promised pardon to sinners not only in Ezekiel, because these words antedated that, but also in Leviticus: if they make amends for their iniquity, then I will remember my covenant (Lev 26:41), and Deuteronomy: if, led by repentance of heart, you turn to God, the Lord your God will bring you back, and have compassion on you (Deut 30:1). Thus you may overcome when you are judged by men that you ought not pardon me.

Second these words are connected with the verse against you only have I sinned, i.e., in comparison with you who alone are just. And this is what he means when he says that you may be justified, i.e., may you appear just in comparison to me and other sinners: the Lord is just, and loves justice (Ps 10:8), and this not only in deeds but also in your words, which is the greatest of all according to James, if anyone does not offend in word (Jas 3:2). And may overcome when you are judged, i.e., when you are compared to anyone else in judgment: judge between me and my vineyard (Isa 5:3).

Third, these words are referred to Christ, who alone is without sin: he committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips (2 Pet 2:22) and is, therefore, justified in his words as compared to all men. And overcome sin, death, and the devil: the Lion of the tribe of Judah has conquered (Rev 5:5), when you are judged unjustly by Pilate: your cause has been judged as that of the wicked (Job 36:17).

David had sinned in the case of Uriah the Hittite. Because he knew that the promise would not be given to sinners, he pleaded that the righteousness of the words of God might overrule the judgment which said that the promise should not be given to sinners and that it might sanctify the penitent in order to give him what God had promised he would give to the righteous. To this Paul adds that … if God is justified because we are sinners, it would be wrong of him to pardon us on that account. If it can really be said that our wickedness is of some advantage to God, then there is some measure of truth in this reasoning. But it is dangerous to speak like that. God is not unjust if he judges, because our unrighteousness is of no benefit to him. It is not as if he would somehow be justified by our sins or as if he would somehow rejoice at our sins, by which he alone would then appear to be righteous.This way of thinking suits men but not God, because it does not happen that God should ever be unjust, only man. Nor does our unrighteousness make God righteous if he gives to us sinners what he promised to the saints, for although we are sinners, we are reformed by repentance so that it is not as sinners but as those who have been cleansed that we are readied to receive the promise.

When adversities come … or when by God's just judgment hostility, dryness or death is imposed, we should attribute this to our sins rather than to God's injustice.

And God does not inflict punishment from wrath, but for the ends of justice; since it is not expedient that justice should be neglected on our account. Each one of us, who sins, with his own free-will chooses punishment, and the blame lies with him who chooses. God is without blame. "But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous, who taketh vengeance? God forbid." It is clear, then, that those who are not at enmity with the truth, and do not hate the Word, will not hate their own salvation, but will escape the punishment of enmity.

"But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? is God unrighteous Who taketh vengeance? I speak as a man. God forbid." He solves one perplexity by another again. Yet as this is not clear, we must needs declare it more clearly. What is it then he means? God honored the Jews: they did despite to Him. This gives Him the victory, and shows the greatness of His love towards man, in that He honored them even such as they were. Since then, he means, we did despite to Him and wronged Him, God by this very thing became victorious, and His righteousness was shown to be clear. Why then (a man may say) am I to be punished, who have been the cause of His victory by the despite I did Him? Now how does he meet this? It is, as I was saying, by another absurdity again. For if it were you, he says, that were the cause of the victory, and after this are punished, the thing is an act of injustice. But if He is not unjust, and yet you are punished, then you are no more the cause of the victory. And note his apostolic reverence; for after saying, "Is God unrighteous Who taketh vengeance?" he adds, "I speak as a man." As if, he means, any body were to argue in the way men reason. For what things seem with us to be justice, these the just judgment of God far exceedeth, and has certain other unspeakable grounds for it.

Paul says that it is wrong to say that God is unjust for bringing wrath on men. For how will the one who judges the world be thought to be unjust, when his very title of Judge shows that he does nothing without judgment? And where there is judgment, it follows that there will be justice. For the words judge and judgment are both derived from justice.The idea being expressed here does not accord with God or with the wisdom of God, but with man and with what has just been said, viz.: "All men are liars." But it is perfectly logical and right to say that justice is the enemy of unrighteousness, just as life is the enemy of death and light is the enemy of darkness. Therefore God, in whom is justice, is said to bring wrath on men, in whom unrighteousness dwells. For justice and unrighteousness are natural enemies. So how could God be regarded as unjust, simply because he is fighting unrighteousness?

Here he presents one objection. Some could say: if from the fact that God bestowed benefits upon us and we proved ungrateful to Him, He turns out to be even more faithful, then why is He angry, that is, why does He punish us, if we became the cause of His justification and victory? Such is the objection. The words "I speak in human terms" have this meaning. Thus, he says, I answer in God's defense according to human reasoning, that is, as far as a sensible person can answer, for the actions of God have certain grounds incomprehensible to us, surpass human reason, and have no need of our defense.

Then when he says, but if our wickedness, he excludes a false understanding of the text he cited. For someone might understand these words according to the sense that that would be taken in a causal, not a consecutive, sense. Then it would follow that man's sin would be directly ordained to commend God's justice. But the Apostle shows that this is false. Hence he says that that is used consecutively, on the ground that David sinned and then the manifestation of divine justice followed, but not causally, as if a man's sin commended God's justice.

He proves this by showing that it leads to something unfitting in two ways: first, on the part of divine judgment; second, on the part of human judgment. In regard to the first he does three things: first, he presents the false sense; second, he shows that something unfitting follows from this, at what shall we say? Is God unjust; third, he shows that it is unfitting, at God forbid!

It should be noted that above the Apostle had made two comparisons; in the first he compared divine truth to human falsity when he said: but God is true and every man a liar; in the second, God's justice to human sin, in the words of a psalm, where it is said: against you, you only, have I sinned (Ps 51:4), that you may be justified. In regard to the first comparison he says: if these words are taken to mean that our iniquity directly commends God's justice, what shall we say? In other words, we could not accept the unfittingness that follows. For sin is not necessary for God to have his justice commended: he does not desire a multitude of faithless and useless children (Sir 16:1).

He expresses the unfittingness that follows, when he says: is God unjust, who executes wrath, i.e., vengeance for sin. For this follows from the supposition. For if sin were directly ordained to commending justice, it would not be deserving of punishment but of reward. Consequently, God would be unjust in punishing men for sin, contrary to what is stated in Deuteronomy: God is faithful and without iniquity (Deut 32:4).

It is true that it would not have been just if God had judged the world if its sins were of some benefit to him, so that whenever sinners received forgiveness at his nod, God would appear to be good. Then if they had not sinned, according to this reasoning, he would not appear to be righteous. For if they had not sinned there would be nothing to forgive, and God would not be good. But this kind of thinking is absurd!

In this passage the word world means the people who are in this world, just as we read elsewhere that "the whole world is in the power of the evil one."

The Apostle resolves it very wisely and to the reproach of the Jews. From the fact that God punishes you, it does not follow that you are the cause of God's victory; for it would be unjust for a victor to punish the one who was the cause of his victory. But God is not unjust: otherwise, how could God judge the world if He were unjust? Therefore, when God punishes you, and He is not unjust, it follows that you did not become the cause of His victory by sinning, for God could have prevailed otherwise even if you had not turned out to be evil.

He rejects this unfittingness, when he says God forbid, that God is unjust. I speak according to man, i.e., I say these words not from my understanding but from that of a man in error, as is said: for while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh? (1 Cor 3:3).

He shows that this must not be admitted, adding: otherwise, namely, if God is unjust, how shall God judge this world, i.e., how could he be the universal and supreme judge of the world? For it is necessary that the first and highest item in every class be unerring, just as the first mover is unchangeable. Hence it is written: I will judge the world with justice (Ps 96:13). A like argument is presented in Job: of a truth God will not do wickedly, and the Almighty will not pervert justice. Who gave him charge over the earth and who laid on him the whole world? (Job 34:12). In other words: if he were not to judge justly, it would be necessary to suppose that someone else is judge of the world.

"For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto His glory: why yet am I also judged as a sinner?" For if God, he means is shown to be a Lover of man, and righteous, and good, by your acts of disobedience, you ought not only to be exempt from punishment but even to have good done unto you. But if so, that absurdity will be found to result, which is in circulation with so many, that good comes of evil, and that evil is the cause of good; and one of the two is necessary, either that He be clearly unjust in punishing, or that if He punish not, it is from our vices that He hath the victory. And both of these are absurd to a degree.

There are many kinds of religion in this world, many schools of philosophy, and many teachings which promote false assertions and are backed up with lying arguments. Those who invent them have a false reputation for wisdom—people of little or no authority. We should recognize them for what they are. Because of them many false statements are commonly accepted as true. The whole world, including religion, is now burdened with lying opinions. Even the elect are being led astray, if you can imagine that. The truth of God is now attacking and refuting every lie. Faith in God's truth, God's wisdom and God's Word is undercutting all claims of false teaching. By each of these lies which had previously been asserted by men, the truth of God is abounding, by demonstrating their superficiality and by communicating the simple truth of faith in each and every case. In this way, says the apostle, the truth of God abounds through the falsehood of men.

Again he repeats what was said before, in order to clarify it. If through my transgression God appeared righteous and faithful, then why, after all, condemn me, who has rendered a service to the glory of God? In that case I deserve not condemnation, but a reward.

Then when he says for if the truth, he shows the same on the part of human judgment. He does three things: first, he presents the false understanding of the above words; second, he shows the unfittingness that follows, at why am I also yet judged; third, he shows that it is unfitting, at whose damnation.

He expresses the false understanding according to the comparison of divine truth to human falsity, when he says: but if through my lie, i.e., on account of my falsity, the truth of God, being manifested, has more abounded unto his glory, man's falsity directly obtains an increase of glory. This is contrary to what is stated in Job: does God need you to speak deceitfully for him? (Job 13:7).

This is why the apostle asked himself this question. The matter was raised by opponents, as if this were the meaning of the preaching of the forgiveness of sins—that they should do evil and good would come of it. That is, they should sin so that by forgiving their sins God should appear to be good, according to what has just been said above. Paul calls this blasphemy and rejects it as a bad interpretation of God's teaching. Faith is not meant to encourage people to sin by preaching that God will ultimately be vindicated. Rather, it gives sinners a remedy so that having recovered their health they may live under the law of God and not sin again.

Perhaps it is such people that the apostle attacks in the epistle to the Romans when he writes: "And not as we are blasphemously accused and some assert that we say, Let us do evil that good may come, an argument which is rightly condemned." These are they who when reading the Bible pervert the sense to their own desires by their tone of voice, and by changing certain accents and marks of punctuation twist words that are wise and useful to conform to their own lusts.

That the catechumen ought now no longer to sin. In the Epistle of Paul to the Romans: "Let us do evil until the good things come; whose condemnation is just."

These men, even as the Gentiles, have been sent forth by Satan to bring dishonour upon the Church, so that, in one way or another, men hearing the things which they speak, and imagining that we all are such as they, may turn away their ears from the preaching of the truth; or, again, seeing the things they practise, may speak evil of us all, who have in fact no fellowship with them, either in doctrine or in morals, or in our daily conduct. But they lead a licentious life, and, to conceal their impious doctrines, they abuse the name [of Christ], as a means of hiding their wickedness; so that "their condemnation is just," when they receive from God a recompense suited to their works.

"If not (as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil that good may come? Whose damnation is just." For whereas Paul said, "where sin abounded grace did much more abound" (Rom. v. 20), in ridicule of him and perverting what he said to another meaning, they said, We must cling to vice that we may get what is good. But Paul said not so; however to correct this notion it is that he says, "What then? shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid!" (ib. vi. 1, 2.) For I said it, he means, of the times which are past, not that we should make this a practice. To lead them away then from this suspicion, he said, that henceforth this was even impossible. For "how shall we," he says, "that are dead unto sin, live any longer therein?" Against the Greeks then he inveighs without difficulty. For their life was exceeding abandoned. But of the Jews, even if their life seemed to have been careless, still they had great means of cloaking these things in the Law and circumcision, and the fact of God having conversed with them, and their being the teachers of all. And this is why he strips them even of these, and shows that for these they were the more punished, and this is the conclusion to which he has here drawn his discussion.

This was not the intention of the apostles' teaching. On the contrary, they demanded that everyone abstain from all manner of wickedness.

And if this is fair, then what the pagans say about us would also be fair. The pagans, hearing the words of Paul: "where sin abounded, grace did much more abound" (Rom. 5:20), subjected them to ridicule and maintained that Christians say: let us do evil that good may come, let us sin more that grace may abound. These words of the pagans, spoken by them in reproach and mockery of us, are applicable in the present case as well, if one admits that God manifests His goodness thanks to our wickedness and ingratitude. But in reality it is not so. The speech of the pagans is the speech of those who always speak lies. "Whose judgment is just," that is, they will be punished justly. So then, by sinning I do not become the cause of God's justification, because I am condemned as a sinner; for if I were sinning for the glory of God, I would not be condemned.

Then he adds two unfitting conclusions that follow: one is that man should not be regarded a sinner for lying, on the ground that it is directly ordained to God's glory. And this is what he says: why am I, i.e., even now, yet judged by men as a sinner for being false: whereas wickedness is fearful, it bears witness of its condemnation (Wis 17:8), because sinners are condemned by the judgment of all. The other unfitting conclusion is that it lends support to the false accusation leveled against the apostles. For they preached that through the abounding grace of Christ the debt for an abundance of sins was paid, as is stated below: where sin abounded, grace did more abound (Rom 5:20). For this the apostles were blasphemed, as if preaching that men should do evil in order that good be obtained. This would follow, if man's falsehood directly commended God's grace and truth. Therefore, he says: and why not do evil by sinning and teaching falsehood, that there may come good, i.e., that God's truth and justice be commended, as we are slandered: when slandered, we try to conciliate (1 Cor 4:13), and as some affirm that we say, by twisting our words: which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction (2 Pet 3:16).

He rejects these unfitting conclusions when he says whose damnation is just, i.e., those who do evil that good may come. For just as it is not correct to deduce truth from falsity, so it is wrong to reach a good end through evil means: why does the way of the wicked prosper? Why do all who are treacherous thrive? (Jer 12:1). Or whose, namely, those who accuse us of this falsely, damnation is just. For perverters of sacred doctrine are justly condemned: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book (Rev 22:18).

Paul is saying: "Why go on talking like this? For we have shown by the examples given that all, Jews and Gentiles alike, are guilty and that the law is being pursued in vain." For Paul first showed that the Gentiles are guilty according to the law of nature and also because they did not accept the law of Moses, for which reason their case is very dire indeed. Then he showed that the Jews were also guilty. While they appeared to be living under God's law and defended their privilege by the merit of their ancestors, they in fact brought the grace of God into disrepute because they rejected the promise made to their ancestors.

"What then have we more than they? For we have proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin. As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one." He had accused the Gentiles, he had accused the Jews; it came next in order to mention the righteousness which is by faith. For if the law of nature availed not, and the written Law was of no advantage, but both weighed down those that used them not aright, and made it plain that they were worthy of greater punishment, then after this the salvation which is by grace was necessary. Speak then of it, O Paul, and display it. But as yet he does not venture, as having an eye to the violence of the Jews, and so turns afresh to his accusation of them; and first he brings in as accuser, David speaking of the same things at length, which Isaiah mentioned all in short compass, so furnishing a strong curb for them, so that they might not bound off, nor any of his hearers, while the matters of faith were laid open to them, might after this start away; being beforehand safely held down by the accusations of the prophets. For there are three excesses which the prophet lays down; he says that all of them together did evil, and that they did not do good indifferently with evil, but that they followed after wickedness alone, and followed it also with all earnestness. And next that they should not say, "What then, if these things were said to others?" he goes on:

Here it must be understood that the reference is to all men, whether they are under the written law [of Moses] or the natural law. For we understand that this applies to the Gentiles in the same way as we have already said above. When they begin to do the works of the law by nature and become a law for themselves, then they are reproached by their conscience for the things they do which are contrary to that law. For this reason it seems to me that those who have thought that the law of nature is the law of God and that the law of Moses is merely the written law are correct. If Paul was speaking of the written law, the law of Moses, when he said: "Sin is not imputed when there is no law," neither Cain nor those who perished in the flood nor those who were burnt with fire at Sodom would have had their sins imputed to them. But since we see that not only did they have their sins imputed to them, they also suffered retribution for them, it is clear that Paul was speaking here of the natural law, which with the exception of the early years of childhood, is present in all men. For this reason he was quite right to say that all are under the power of sin. Whence it seems to me that the philosophers were right when they said that every mortal being on coming to the age of discretion, when by the entry of the natural law it might distinguish between good and evil, first of all discovers what is evil and afterward combats it by means of instructions, precepts and warnings, so as to move on to virtue. I think that Paul was agreeing with them when he said: "But when the commandment came, sin sprang to life." … It must not be thought that everyone is guilty of all the sins which are listed below. Rather, some are guilty of some of them, and others are guilty of others but in such a way that taken together the whole range of sinfulness is found in the human race.

Paul finds no reason for saying that the Jews are better than others.… Both Jews and Gentiles are under sin—something we not only deduce by reason but also corroborate by the witness of the Jews themselves.

Having said above that the Jews have a certain advantage, because the law was entrusted and committed to them, he now proves that they have no advantage by their deeds. For, as those who did not preserve what was entrusted to them, they will be subjected to great condemnation. Therefore, although they had a certain advantage, as chosen by God, yet since by their deeds they dishonored the One who honored them and chose them, they not only no longer have any advantage, but will also be subjected to greater condemnation. He speaks as if from the person of the Jews: "What then? Do we have an advantage," do we surpass others, are we more pleasing to God than the rest, we Jews who received the law and circumcision? "Not at all." For the Jews, not to say more, sinned just as the Gentiles did. And from where is this evident? From the prophets, namely David and Isaiah.

After showing the Jews' advantage over the gentiles so far as God's blessings are concerned, the Apostle now rejects their vainglory, by which they preferred themselves to gentiles converted to the faith. First, he states his point; second, he proves it, at for we have charged.

First, therefore, he says: I have asked what advantage has the Jew. The first is that God's words were delivered to them. What then shall we Jews say to converts to the faith? Do we excel them, namely, those gentiles converted to the faith? For this was a matter discussed among them: a dispute also rose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest (Luke 23:24). He answers this when he says, no, not so.

But this seems to be at variance with an earlier statement, which said that their advantage was much every way (Rom 3:2). The Gloss explains that in the first statement the Apostle was thinking of the Jews in the time of the law, but now he is speaking of the time of grace because, as is written in Colossians: in Christ there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised (Col 3:11), since these make no difference so far as the state of grace is concerned. But this explanation does not seem to be altogether in keeping with the Apostle's intention, because later he will show that even while they were under the law, they were under the power of sin, just as the gentiles were, and even more so: this is Jerusalem; I have set her in the center of the nations, with countries round about her. And she has wickedly rebelled against my ordinances and become more wicked than these countries (Ezek 5:5). Hence, it seems that above he was showing the excellence of God's blessings; consequently, he did not say that the Jew was more excellent, but that something greater had been conferred on the Jew. Here he is rejecting the notion that they are excellent persons, because in spite of receiving God's blessings they did not use them properly.

Then when he says for we have charged, he establishes his points: first, that the Jews do not excel the gentiles so far as the state of sin is concerned; second, so far as the state of justice is concerned, at but now, without the law. He establishes the first in two ways: first, from what has been stated above; second, from an authority, at as it is written.

First, therefore, he says: we have charged, i.e., we have supported with reasons, that Jews and Greeks, i.e., gentiles, are all under sin: from the sole of the foot even to the head there is no soundness in him (Isa 1:6). For he showed, first of all, that the gentiles suppressed the truth they knew by their wickedness and injustice; second, that the Jews, after receiving the law, dishonored God by transgressing it.

From unrighteousness Paul goes on to list their evil deeds and even adds some worse ones, in order to show that there was no hope for them unless they cried out for the mercy of Christ, who forgives sins.

Pambo said to Antony, 'What shall I do?' Antony said, 'Do not trust in your own righteousness. Do not go on sorrowing over a deed that is past. Keep your tongue and your belly under control.'

For they are all gone aside, He exclaims, they are all become useless. There is none that understands, there is not so much as one. With their tongues they have practised deceit, their throat is an open sepulchre, the poison of asps is under their lips, destruction and misery are in their paths, and the way of peace they have not known.

It may appear that there are other scriptural passages which seem to contradict this one by suggesting that some people were righteous, e.g., when it is said of Sodom in relation to Jerusalem: "Sodom is righteous compared with you." But note carefully what Scripture actually says. It does not say that Sodom was righteous but that since Jerusalem had committed so many sins and what it was doing was so awful, Sodom appeared to be righteous by comparison.… For this reason, I am afraid that when I look at those of us who are in the church of God and who claim to follow his law and the commands of the gospel, there are not a few unbelievers who appear to be righteous by comparison.

That no one has done good, not even one, is a hard saying and difficult to understand. How is it possible that no one, Jew or Greek, has ever done anything good? Are we supposed to believe that nobody has ever shown hospitality, fed the hungry, clothed the naked, delivered the innocent from the hands of the powerful or done anything similar? It does not seem possible to me that Paul was intending to assert anything as incredible as that. I think that what he meant must be understood as follows. If someone lays the foundation for a house and puts up one or two walls or transports some building materials to the site, can he be said to have built the house, just because he has set to work on it? The man who will be said to have built the house is the one who has finished off each and every part of it. So I think that here the apostle is saying that no one has done good in the sense that no one has brought goodness to perfection and completion. If we ask ourselves who is truly good and who has done good perfectly, we shall find only him who said: "I am the good shepherd," and again: "The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep."

The psalm from which this quote is taken speaks of the fool. Paul shows that witness to the fool will be fulfilled particularly at the coming of Christ. When he appears, not one righteous person will be found.

For the passage beginning with the words "there is none righteous" and ending with "their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness" belongs to David (Ps. 13:3–5, 9:28, 139:4), while the passage from the words "their feet are swift" to the words "they have not known the way of peace" belongs to Isaiah (Isa. 59:7–8); then again follow the words of David (Ps. 35:2). So, he presents the most notable prophets as accusers of the Jews, and shows that they speak in complete agreement. This is why after the words of Isaiah he again brings in the words of David. For Isaiah speaks clearly about the Jews, and David speaks about them as well.

Then when he says as it is written, he establishes his point by the authority of the Psalmist: first, he quotes him; second, he explains, at now we know. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions sins of omission; second, sins of commission, at their throat. He touches on the sins of omission in two ways: first, by removing the sources of good works; second, by removing the good works themselves, at all have turned out of the way.

Now there are three sources or principles that make a work good: one of these pertains to the justice of the work, namely, justice, which he says is lacking: there is not any man just (Ps 13:3). The godly man has perished from the earth; and there is none upright among men (Mic 7:2).

No man is just can be interpreted in three ways: in one way as meaning that no one is just within himself and of himself, but of himself everyone is a sinner and it is owing to God that he is righteous: the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty (Exod 34:6). In another way it means that no one is just in every way but has some sin according to Proverbs: who can say: I have made my heart clean? (Prov 20:9), and Ecclesiastes: surely there is not a just man on earth who does good and never sins (Eccl 7:20). In a third way it can be understood as referring to the wicked members of a populace, among which no one is just. For it is the custom of Scripture sometimes to speak of an entire populace in terms of its evil members and sometimes of its good members, as in Jeremiah, where it is stated that when Jeremiah finished saying everything the Lord had commanded him to say to the entire populace, the priests and prophets and the entire people took hold of him and said that he would die the death (Jeremiah 26:8ff.). Then it is added: then the princes and all the people said to the priests and prophets: this man does not deserve the sentence of death (Jer 26:16). However, the first two meanings seem to be more in keeping with the Apostle's intent; and the same must be said for the following.

Seek God. Do not be like Asa the king of Judah, who after receiving many blessings from God fell so far that when he suffered lameness in his feet he would not seek God even though there was a prophet present.

People who are naturally religious find difficulty in understanding the horror of such a revelation. Amiable agnostics will talk cheerfully about "man's search for God." To me, as I then was, they might as well have talked about the mouse's search for the cat.

I judge it necessary to add to these details also what, by garbling passages of Scripture, they try to persuade us concerning their Propator, who was unknown to all before the coming of Christ. Their object in this is to show that our Lord announced another Father than the Maker of this universe, whom, as we said before, they impiously declare to have been the fruit of a defect. For instance, when the prophet Isaiah says, "But Israel hath not known Me, and My people have not understood Me," they pervert his words to mean ignorance of the invisible Bythus. And that which is spoken by Hosea, "There is no truth in them, nor the knowledge of God," they strive to give the same reference. And, "There is none that understandeth, or that seeketh after God: they have all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable," they maintain to be said concerning ignorance of Bythus. Also that which is spoken by Moses, "No man shall see God and live," has, as they would persuade us, the same reference.

Even the apostle Paul himself says that he knows in part and understands in part. So who is there who can make a claim that he understands? For however much he may understand, it will appear that he understands through a glass darkly and that only after he lays aside this earthly body will he see face to face. … Thus it is that "no one understands, no one seeks for God." For as long as we are preoccupied with the cares of the body and seek the things of the body, we cannot seek God nor can we think his thoughts.

One who does not understand does not seek. Or perhaps it is that one does not understand because one does not seek. One seeks for God by enquiring after his will.… The sinner has not known the will of his master. "Know me, know my will," as the popular saying goes.

The second element that makes a work good is intellectual discernment, whose absence is declared when he says, there is none who understands: they have neither knowledge nor understanding (Ps 82:5); he would not understand (Ps 36:3).

The third element is a right intention, whose absence is described when he says, there is none who seeks after God, namely, by directing his intention toward him: it is time to seek the Lord that he may come and rain salvation upon you (Hos 10:12).

No one doubts that those who do not look to God for help are inclined to seek help from vain things, and vanity is an idol. Thus they become useless. Once that happens they cannot do good either, for those who have already fallen just go from bad to worse.

The Scripture shut up all things under sin, the first through ignorance, the second through weakness, and the third through malice, so that when Christ came, He could have mercy on them all. And the Apostle wonders at this, and quotes the authority of the Psalm: "All alike have gone astray; they have become perverse; there is not one that does good, not even one."

Paul did not treat this passage as if it were prophetic but rather because what David said about transgressors was still a good summary of what was going on in Paul's day. Even now we still cite texts of this kind in our sermons, because what they say can be applied to our congregations.

Furthermore, as soon as anyone turns away from good, he immediately becomes useless. For vice is nothing other than a perversion of the natural impulses toward good; therefore, by driving a person toward what is contrary to nature, it renders him useless. For nature no longer makes use of him, just as it does not make use of those who are sick in the conduct of its affairs.

Then he removes the good works themselves. First, he cites offenses against the divine law when he says, all have turned out of the way, namely, from regulation by divine law: they have all turned to their own way (Isa 56:11). Second, failure to pursue the end; hence he adds, they have become unprofitable together. For we call unprofitable whatever does not attain its end. Therefore, when men turn from God for whom they were made, they are rendered unprofitable: the brood of the ungodly will be of no use (Wis 4:3). Third, he excludes the good works themselves, when he adds, there is none who does good: they are skilled in doing evil, but how to do good they know not (Jer 4:22).

He adds, not so much as one. This can be taken exclusively, to mean: except the one who alone did good by redeeming the human race: one man among a thousand I found, but a woman among all these I have not found (Eccl 7:28). Or it can be taken inclusively, to mean: there is not even one pure man doing good, i.e., what is perfect: search the squares to see if you can find a man, one who does justice and seeks truth (Jer 5:1).

Already chained to evil, they wanted if possible to devour the good, so that just as a sepulchre is open to receive corpses, so their throat is open to devour the good.… The words of men are like tiny mice. They speak in order to deceive, and just as poison flows from the lips of a serpent, so trickery and deceit flow from their lips.

Hence the threatening countenance, the lowering aspect, pallor in the face, trembling on the lips, gnashing of the teeth, mad words, unbridled revilings, a hand prompt for the violence of slaughter; even if for the time deprived of a sword, yet armed with the hatred of an infuriate mind. And accordingly the Holy Spirit says in the Psalms: "Be not jealous against him who walketh prosperously in his way." And again: "The wicked shall observe the righteous, and shall gnash upon him with his teeth. But God shall laugh at him; for He seeth that his day is coming." The blessed Apostle Paul designates and points out these when he says, "The poison of asps is under their lips, and their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood, destruction and misery are in their ways, who have not known the way of peace; neither is the fear of God before their eyes."

This comes from Psalm 5[:10]. It seems to me that Paul is using this text to describe different types of human sin. The analogy: Every grave contains the uncleanness of the dead body inside. This is why our Lord said in the Gospel that the scribes and Pharisees were whited sepulchres. On the outside they appear to be beautiful, but on the inside they are full of all sorts of uncleanness. But in this passage Paul seems to be revealing something more than this about the sins of those whom he is talking about, because he says that they are an "open" grave, not one which is shut and covered up. Those who were called a closed sepulchre had enough sense of shame not to reveal their sins to the public. But these people are called an open grave because they have their uncleanness and impurity on display, and they are so accustomed to evil that … whenever they open their mouth, instead of speaking the Word of God, the word of life, they open their throat and speak the word of death, the word of the devil, not from the heart but from the grave. Whenever you see a man cursing and swearing, you may be sure that he is one of this type."They use their tongues to deceive." "To deceive" means to say one thing and think another. I am not certain that even the justified and the elect are entirely free of this sin. Some commit it more and others less. The only one who is perfect in this respect is the one of whom it is written: "He had committed no sin, and there was no deceit in his mouth." There may be someone who is careful and cautious enough to avoid major failings in this respect, but who is there who does not fall into this trap either from a sense of shame or from neglect? Occasionally things which should be done are overlooked because of forgetfulness, and in order for no blame to appear they are excused in a way which does not correspond to the facts. This is why Peter, realizing that these are all different types of deception, wrote this in his epistle: "Put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander. Like newborn babes, long for pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up to salvation."35 The bite of the serpent kills the body with its poison. Even a bite of a poisonous word may kill the soul by deception. This may be applied both to those who surround others with slanderous remarks and of those who, by heretical teaching tainted with the poison of the devil, deceive the souls of the simple.

The stench of their teaching and flattery contaminates and kills those who listen. This is why a grave is carefully sealed, so that it does not continue to breed disease among the living by its odor. They express one thing with their mouths but another with their hearts. The venom of asps is mentioned because it is supposed to be the most harmful.

Anger has been prohibited, our spirits retained, the petulance of the hand checked, the poison of the tongue extracted.

Then when he says their throats, he mentions the sins of commission: first, sins of speech; second, sinful deeds, at their feet swift. The sins of the heart can be gathered from these.

In regard to sins of speech he mentions four things. First, readiness and foulness, when he says: their throat is an open sepulchre. For an open grave has two features. For it is ready to receive the dead. According to this, a man's throat is said to be an open grave, when it is prepared to utter deadly remarks in the manner described by Jeremiah: their quiver is like an open tomb (Jer 5:16). Second, it exudes a foul odor: you are like white-washed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within they are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness (Matt 23:27). Therefore, a person from whose mouth proceeds the foul odor of filthy remarks has a throat which is an open grave: fire and smoke and sulphur issued from their mouths (Rev 9:17).

Second, in regard to sins of speech, he touches on deception when he says, with their tongues they have dealt deceitfully, having one thing in their heart and another in their words: their tongue is a deadly arrow; it speaks deceitfully (Jer 9:8).

Third, he mentions the havoc wrought by their words, when he says: the venom of asps is under their lips, because they utter words which kill their neighbor either spiritually or bodily: their wine is the poison of serpents and the cruel venom of asps (Deut 32:33).

It is clear and obvious that evil people are always throwing curses and bitterness at the good in an attempt to harm and distract them.

"God stood in the congregation of the gods, He judges among the gods." He [here] refers to the Father and the Son, and those who have received the adoption; but these are the Church. For she is the synagogue of God, which God-that is, the Son Himself-has gathered by Himself. Of whom He again speaks: "The God of gods, the Lord hath spoken, and hath called the earth." Who is meant by God? He of whom He has said, "God shall come openly, our God, and shall not keep silence;" that is, the Son, who came manifested to men who said, "I have openly appeared to those who seek Me not." But of what gods [does he speak]? [Of those] to whom He says, "I have said, Ye are gods, and all sons of the Most High." To those, no doubt, who have received the grace of the "adoption, by which we cry, Abba Father."

Paul did not say that their lips were full of the poison of asps. For although many may be involved in sins of that kind, there are not many who are totally given over to the harm which that poison can do. On the other hand, there are many whose mouths are full of curses and bitterness. For whose mouth is so pure that he never curses? I am not speaking now of those who deserve to be cursed but of those whom God has not cursed, i.e., the just and innocent. For this vice is so prevalent and so automatic a trait of human weakness, especially with respect to those who are under or inferior to us, that many people would not even think to call it cursing.

There is not just one kind of malicious talk. What is said out of malice is without doubt said recklessly.

Fourth, he designates the abundance of these sins when he says: whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness, because they have a plentiful supply of curses, for they curse in slandering others, contrary to what he says below: bless them and curse not (Rom 12:14). And bitterness, inasmuch as they do not hesitate to say insulting words to their neighbor's face, being provoked by bitterness, contrary to what is written in Ephesians: let all bitterness be put away from you (Eph 4:31).

Scripture says this about the murder of the prophets, whom they killed without hesitation—"slow to do good but swift to murder."

Destruction and misery are in their ways, and the way of peace have they not known. The fear of God is not before their eyes.

This may seem to be an infrequent crime. But we take it to include not only those who shed blood by killing the body but also those who by some deception or other separate the soul from God.… For if the one who separates the body from the soul which gives it life is called a murderer, how much more truly will the one who separates the soul from the true life, which is God, be called a murderer?Feet in this passage refers to the way we live our life, as the prophet says: "My feet had almost stumbled."

Then when he says their feet swift he touches on sinful deeds, in regard to which he mentions three things. First, readiness to do wickedly. Hence he says, their feet swift, i.e., their feelings, to shed blood, i.e., to commit any serious sin, because among the sins committed against our neighbor, murder is the most grievous: their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed blood (Prov 1:16).

Since they hastened to do evil, Paul called their path a ruinous and unhappy way.

For both the law and the Gospel are the energy of one Lord, who is "the power and wisdom of God;" and the terror which the law begets is merciful and in order to salvation. "Let not alms, and faith, and truth fail thee, but hang them around thy neck." In the same way as Paul, prophecy upbraids the people with not understanding the law. "Destruction and misery are in their ways, and the way of peace have they not known." "There is no fear of God before their eyes." "Professing themselves wise, they became fools." "And we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully." "Desiring to be teachers of the law, they understand," says the apostle, "neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm." "Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned."

"Destruction and misery" is sin, for nothing destroys the soul like sin, by its crooked path. For virtue, as our natural good, prepares for us a smooth and level path, while vice, as something contrary to nature, marked by deficiencies and excesses, causes us sometimes to be carried upward and sometimes downward, and therefore makes our movement uneven and difficult — to say nothing of the fact that it prepares punishment for us afterward.

Second, he touches on the number of injuries they inflict on others when he adds: in their ways, i.e., in their deeds, are destruction; because they crush others by oppressing them: it is in his mind to destroy (Isa 10:7); and misery, inasmuch as they deprive men of their goods and reduce them to wretchedness: they send men away naked, taking away their clothes (Job 24:7).

Yet these two, destruction and misery, can be taken as designating the punishment rather than the sin. Then the sense is: in their paths are destruction and misery, i.e., their deeds, which are signified as paths, lead them to misery. In this case, destruction would refer to the oppressive punishment they suffer for their sins: they shall be broken as a potter's vessel (Isa 30:14) and misery, to the punishment of damnation, because they will be refused eternal happiness: they are miserable, with their hopes set on dead things (Wis 14:10).

Having chosen the way of hostility, along which they were heading toward the second death, they did not want to know about the way which leads to eternal life. This is called the way of peace, because with God as its guardian it will have no disturbance. Those who will the good have this rest with God.

Christ is our peace. Therefore the way of peace is the way of Christ, which sinners do not know.

"They do not know the way of peace," that is, of a godly life; for a godly life is a path of tranquility. "Take," says the Lord, "My yoke... and you will find rest" (Matt. 11:29): this is the way to the true peace of Christ!

Third, he shows their persistence in evil, from which men are returned in two ways. In one way by a desire to be at peace with others. Against this he says, the way of peace they have not known, i.e., have not accepted: among those who hate peace I was peaceful (Ps 120:6).

This could also refer in a particular way to the Jews who did not believe Christ, i.e., that they have not known the way of peace, namely, Christ, of whom it is written: he is our peace (Eph 2:14).

Since people of this kind have no sense, they have no fear of God. For "the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom," says Solomon. But Scripture did not say that they did not have the fear of God. It said: "There is no fear of God before their eyes." For seeing how evil their works were and not being horrified by them, they are said not to have the fear of God before their eyes.

Where there is no fear, there is neither wisdom nor justice nor grace. "Their throat is an open sepulchre, the poison of asps is under their lips, with their tongues they acted deceitfully, their feet are swift to shed blood: whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness, destruction and unhappiness are in their ways"; "there is no fear of God before their eyes." When a man does not have the fear of God, then his sense is turned to malice and goes forth like the poison of asps. There follows iniquity in deed: whence he says: "With their tongues they acted deceitfully, their feet are swift to shed blood." When a man is disordered in affection with respect to thought, in speech with respect to utterance, and in deed with respect to effect; then he has nothing good. Whence he says: "Their feet are swift to shed blood. Destruction and unhappiness are in their ways, and the way of peace they have not known," namely the way of the grace of the Holy Spirit. And why? Because "there is no fear of God before their eyes."

If you wish to strive to have grace, justice, and wisdom, and these cannot be had without fear: therefore the fear of God is necessary for you. Likewise, where there is no fear, there is foolishness, malice, and iniquity, destruction and unhappiness: but these are to be fled as the worst things.

For both the law and the Gospel are the energy of one Lord, who is "the power and wisdom of God;" and the terror which the law begets is merciful and in order to salvation. "Let not alms, and faith, and truth fail thee, but hang them around thy neck." In the same way as Paul, prophecy upbraids the people with not understanding the law. "Destruction and misery are in their ways, and the way of peace have they not known." "There is no fear of God before their eyes." "Professing themselves wise, they became fools." "And we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully." "Desiring to be teachers of the law, they understand," says the apostle, "neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm." "Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned."

If someone is always thinking of what will please or displease God, then it can be said that the fear of God is always before his eyes. But such a person must be experienced and diligently instructed in the law of God so as not to be afraid when there is no reason to fear. For the fear of God must always be placed before our eyes: not the eyes of the flesh—for it is not something visible or corporeal that we are talking about here—but the eyes of the mind, to which an understanding and awareness of the fear of God are evident and by which, as we have said above, we can discover what ought and ought not to be feared. The one who fears God does not fear the powers of this world.

In another way by the fear of God; but they neither fear God nor regard man (Luke 18:2). Hence he adds, there is no fear of God before their eyes, i.e., in their plans: the fear of the Lord casts out sin; for without fear a person cannot be justified (Sir 1:27).