Romans 4:4–12

No merit is imputed for reward to the man who is subject to the law—either to the law of works, i.e., of Moses, or to the law of nature. For he who is obliged to keep the law is a debtor. A necessity is imposed upon him by the law to keep it whether he wants to or not, so as not to be guilty, as Paul says in another passage: "Those who resist will incur judgment." On the other hand, to believe or not to believe is a matter of choice. No one can be required to accept something which is offered as a gift. But he is invited to receive it. He is not forced but persuaded. He believes what he does not see but hopes for. This is what glorifies God.

Paul was speaking here of the way wages are given. But God gave by grace, because he gave to sinners so that by faith they might live justly, that is, do good works. Thus the good works which we do after we have received grace are not to be attributed to us but rather to him who has justified us by his grace. For if God had wanted to give us our due reward, he would have given us the punishment due to sinners.

Then is not this last the greatest? he means. By no means: for it is to the believer that it is reckoned. But it would not have been reckoned, unless there were something that he contributed himself. And so he too hath God for his debtor, and debtor too for no common things, but great and high ones. For to show his high-mindedness and spiritual understanding, he does not say "to him that believeth" merely.

But as to what he says: "To him who works, the wage is not imputed according to grace but according to debt; but to him who believes in him who justifies the ungodly, faith is reckoned unto righteousness" — he seems to show that in faith there is, as it were, the grace of him who justifies, but in work the justice of him who repays. Yet when I consider the force of the phrase by which he says that it is rendered to the worker according to debt, I can scarcely persuade myself that there can be any work which demands God's recompense as a debt, since even this very thing — that we are able to do anything, or to think, or to speak — we do by his own gift and bounty. What then will be owed by him whose loan to us came first? And therefore we must rather see whether perhaps what he said, "But to him who works, the wage shall be reckoned according to debt," is to be understood of the debt of an evil work. For you will often find sins called debts in the divine volumes, as the Lord himself taught us to say in the prayer: "Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors"; and again when the Lord himself says: "A certain householder had two debtors: one owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty" — and he himself interpreted this as being said of sins. Perhaps then in this place too the Apostle has drawn the wage of work which is rendered according to debt toward that sense which we spoke of above, concerning those who work as Cain also worked the earth; and as he says elsewhere: "Depart from me, you workers of iniquity" — to whom assuredly punishment is paid out as a debt, in place of a wage for iniquity. Whence the Apostle also says in another place: "The wages of sin is death"; and he did not add, so as to say correspondingly, But the wages of righteousness is eternal life. Rather he says: "But the grace of God is eternal life" — so that he might teach that wages, which is certainly like a debt and a payment, is the recompense of punishment and of death, while he assigned eternal life to grace alone. According to this sense I think that what is written in the Gospel too, "With what measure you have measured, with the same it shall be measured back to you," is to be taken of evil works. For God has set no measure to his grace, since it is written: "For God does not give the Spirit by measure."

The doer of righteousness expects a reward, but justification by faith is the gift of the God of all.

The one who works, he says, receives wages as something given to him for his labor as a debt.

Then, when he says, now to him who works, he explains the aforementioned biblical citation as regards the words it was reputed to him as justice.

Two explanations of these words are given in the Gloss. In the first explanation they are linked to the final reward, concerning which

first, he shows how it is related to works;

second, how it is related to faith, at but to him who works not.

First, therefore, he says that to him who works the works of justice, the reward of eternal recompense—concerning which it is said, behold his reward is with him (Isa 40:10)—is not reckoned as a gift only, but according to debt: did you not agree with me for a denarius? (Matt 20:13).

But on the contrary it is stated below: the grace of God is life everlasting (Rom 6:23), and again: the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come (Rom 8:18). Therefore, that reward is not made as due, but as a gift.

The answer is that human works can be considered in two ways. In one way, according to the substance of the works, and considered this way they do not have anything deserving that the reward of eternal glory should be given.

In another way, they can be considered according to their source, namely, insofar as they are performed under God's impulse in accord with the intention of God who predestines. And in this respect the aforesaid reward is due them by debt, because, as is stated below: for whosoever are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God . . . and if sons, heirs also (Rom 8:14, 17).

This refers to somebody who is bound by sin and who therefore does not do what the law commands. Paul says this because to an ungodly person, that is, to a Gentile, who believes in Christ without doing the works of the law, his faith is reckoned for righteousness just as Abraham's was. How then can the Jews think that they have been justified by the works of the law in the same way as Abraham, when they see that Abraham was not justified by the works of the law but by faith alone? Therefore there is no need of the law when the ungodly is justified before God by faith alone.

God makes the ungodly man godly, in order that he might persevere in this godliness and righteousness. For a man is justified in order that he might be just, not so that he might think it is all right to go on sinning.

The life of the soul is changeable. And when the soul lives in unrighteousness, that is its death; when again it becomes righteous, it becomes partaker of another life, which is not what itself is, inasmuch as by rising up to God, and cleaving to God, of Him it is justified. For it is said, "To him that believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." By forsaking God, it becomes unrighteous; by coming to Him, it is made righteous.

For reflect how great a thing it is to be persuaded and have full confidence that God is able on a sudden not to free a man who has lived in impiety from punishment only, but even to make him just, and to count him worthy of those immortal honors. Do not then suppose that this one is lowered in that it is not reckoned unto the former of grace. For this is the very thing that makes the believer glorious; the fact of his enjoying so great grace, of his displaying so great faith. And note too that the recompense is greater. For to the former a reward is given, to the latter righteousness. Now righteousness is much greater than a reward. For righteousness is a recompense which most fully comprehends several rewards. Therefore after proving this from Abraham, he introduces David also as giving his suffrage in favor of the statement made. What then doth David say? and whom doth he pronounce blessed? is it him that triumphs in works, or him that hath enjoyed grace? him that hath obtained pardon and a gift? And when I speak of blessedness, I mean the chiefest of all good things; for as righteousness is greater than a reward, so is blessedness greater than righteousness.

Faith, which believes in the justifier, is the beginning of justification before God. And this faith, when it is justified, is like a root in the soil of the soul, which the rain has watered, so that as it begins to grow by the law of God, branches appear, which bring forth fruit. The root of righteousness does not spring from works; rather, the fruit of works grows from the root of righteousness, viz., by that root of righteousness by which God brings righteousness to the one whom he has accepted apart from works.

If then these things are thought to have been rightly discussed, consequently the things that hang together with them will surely be seen to be understood thus: that to the one who works the works of iniquity a wage is repaid according to the debt of sin; but to the one who believes in him who justifies the ungodly, faith is reckoned unto righteousness — provided we well remember what was said above, in which we showed that faith can be reckoned unto righteousness not for him who believes in part, but for him who believes entirely and perfectly; which faith is so great that it justifies even one who has been ungodly, so that he is no longer ungodly — not like that thief who hung on the cross and blasphemed, but like the one who confessed and said: "Lord Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."

When an ungodly person is converted, God justifies him by faith alone, not for good works which he does not have. On that basis he would have been punished for his ungodly works. But note that Paul does not say one who remains in sin is justified by faith but rather the ungodly, i.e., one who has just come to believe.

The one who believes, although he does not work, nevertheless presents on his part faith — a thing of great significance; for to be convinced that God can not only free from punishment one who has lived in ungodliness, but also make him righteous, is a matter of high value. For this reason, "to the one who believes... his faith is counted as righteousness," that is, God accepts his faith — not in order to give him wages, but in order to justify him. Therefore the one who believes brings something on his part as well, namely faith.

Then when he says but to him, he shows how the eternal reward is related to faith, saying, but to him who works not outward works, for example, because he does not have time to work, as in the case of one who dies immediately after baptism, yet believes in him who justifies the ungodly, namely, in God, of whom he says below: God is he who justifies (Rom 8:33), his faith is reputed, i.e., faith alone without outward works, to justice, so that in virtue of it he is called just and receives the reward of justice, just as if he had done the works of justice, as he says below: with the heart, we believe unto justice (Rom 10:10), and this according to the purpose of the grace of God, i.e., accordingly as God proposes to save men gratuitously: to such as, according to his purpose, are called to be saints (Rom 8:28); he accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will (Eph 1:11).

Another explanation refers those words to man's justification.

He says therefore, to him who works, i.e., if anyone be justified by works, the justice would be reckoned as a reward, not according to grace, but according to debt: and if by grace, it is not now by works; otherwise grace is no more grace (Rom 11:6). But to him who works not, so as to be justified by his works, yet believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reputed to justice, according to the purpose of the grace of God, not that he merits justice through faith, but because the believing itself is the first act of the justice God works in him. For from the fact that he believes in God justifying, he submits himself to his justification and thus receives its effect.

This is the literal explanation and accords with the intention of the Apostle, who lays special stress on the words, it was reputed to him as justice (Gen 15:6), a saying which is used when that which is lacking on someone's part is reckoned to him gratis, as if he had accomplished the whole.

That is why the Apostle says that such reckoning would have no place, if justice were from works, but only as it is from faith.

Paul backs this up by the example of the prophet David, who says that those are blessed of whom God has decreed that, without work or any keeping of the law, they are justified before God by faith alone. Therefore he foretells the blessedness of the time when Christ was born, just as the Lord himself said: "Many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see and to hear what you hear and did not hear it."

And after proving this from Abraham, he introduces David also as giving his suffrage in favor of the statement made. What then doth David say? and whom doth he pronounce blessed? is it him that triumphs in works, or him that hath enjoyed grace? him that hath obtained pardon and a gift? And when I speak of blessedness, I mean the chiefest of all good things; for as righteousness is greater than a reward, so is blessedness greater than righteousness. Having then shown that the righteousness is better, not owing to Abraham's having received it only but also from reasonings (for he hath whereof to boast, he says, before God); he again uses another mode of showing that it is more dignified, by bringing David in to give his suffrage this way. For he also, he says, pronounces him blessed who is so made righteous.

After these things, as if for the confirmation of his statement which he had made — "But to him who does not work, yet believes in him who justifies the ungodly, faith is reckoned unto righteousness" — he takes up a testimony from the Psalms and says: "As David also declares the blessedness of the man to whom God accounts righteousness without works: Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man to whom the Lord has not imputed sin." You see that through these words it can consistently be proved that righteousness is reckoned to a man without works.

Hence it seems to me that the Apostle understood this: that it is impossible for a person in whom, by reason of age, the understanding that discerns between good and evil is already present, to have neither injustice nor justice in him. And if this is so, the soul cannot be found without one of these two; and it is certain that if it has ceased from evils, it is henceforth found among good things. But that soul is not among evils "whose iniquities are forgiven," and "whose sins are covered," and "to whom the Lord has not imputed sin"; it is fitting, therefore, that it be among good things. Suitably, then, in connection with the remission of iniquities and the covering over of sins, and with the fact that the Lord does not impute sin, the Apostle says that justice is reckoned to a person, although he has not yet performed works of justice, but solely because he believed in him who justifies the ungodly. For the beginning of being justified by God is the faith that believes in the one who justifies. And this faith, when it has been justified, clings like a root that has taken in rain within the soil of the soul, so that when it has begun to be cultivated by the law of God, branches rise up in it that bear the fruit of works. Therefore the root of justice does not come from works, but from the root of justice the fruit of works grows — namely from that root of justice by which God credits justice apart from works.

It is a great blessing to obtain the Lord's grace without the work of the law and penance, as if one were receiving some public honor without having earned it.

After demonstrating by the example of the patriarch Abraham that faith is older than the law, Paul quotes a further witness in support of his position, viz., David the prophet and king.

Having proved by the example of Abraham that righteousness or justification is from faith, he presents David as well, who calls blessed the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works, and shows the advantage and superiority of faith.

Then when he says, as David also, he proves the conditional statement by a quotation from a psalm.

First, he gives its sense;

second, he presents its words, at blessed are they;

third, he excludes a false interpretation, at this blessedness, then.

He says: as David also terms the blessedness of a man to whom God reputes, i.e., confers, justice without works, i.e., gratis, without preceding works: not because of deeds done by us in justice (Titus 3:5).

But man's blessedness is from God, as the Psalm says: blessed is the man who makes the Lord his hope (Ps 40:5). Hence, it is plain that he has glory before God who is justified not by the works of the law, as has been said.

Obviously they are blessed, whose iniquities are forgiven without labor or work of any kind and whose sins are covered without any work of penitence being required of them, as long as they believe.How can these words apply to a penitent, when we know that penitents obtain the forgiveness of sin with much struggle and groaning? How can they be applied to a martyr, when we know that the glory of martyrdom is obtained by sufferings and pressures? But the prophet, foreseeing a happy time when the Savior comes, calls them blessed because their sins are forgiven, covered and not reckoned to them, and this without labor or work of any kind.

And he seems to be bringing a testimony beside his purpose. For it does not say, Blessed are they whose faith is reckoned for righteousness. But he does so on purpose, not through inadvertency, to show the greater superiority. For if he be blessed that by grace received forgiveness, much more is he that is made just, and that exhibits faith. For where blessedness is, there all shame is removed, and there is much glory, since blessedness is a greater degree both of reward and of glory. And for this cause what is the advantage of the other he states as unwritten, "Now to him that worketh is the reward reckoned not of grace;" but what the advantage of the faithful is, he brings Scriptural testimony to prove, saying, As David saith, "Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered." What, he means, is it that you say? Is it that "it is not of debt but of grace that he receives forgiveness?" But see it is this person who is pronounced blessed. For he would not have pronounced him so, unless he saw him in the enjoyment of great glory.

Whence I think that David too, in the thirty-first psalm, which he entitled "Of the understanding of David," gave this beginning, admonishing by the very superscription that a deeper understanding must be sought in the things he was about to say, namely that "blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven": concerning which we have spoken, as far as we were able, when we dictated on the Psalms in order. But the difference of the very order prompts us, in that he said first, "Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven"; second, "Whose sins are covered"; third, "To whom the Lord has not imputed sin." And consider whether perhaps this order can be understood as taking place in one and the same soul: so that, because the beginning of the soul's conversion is to abandon evils, for this it may deserve to receive the remission of iniquities; but when it has begun to do good things, covering over, as it were, each single evil that had gone before with fresh good deeds, and bringing in a more abundant number of goods than there had previously been of evils, it is said to cover its sins; but when it has now come to perfection, so that every root of malice is utterly cut away from it, to the point that no trace of wickedness can be found in it, then at last the summit of perfect blessedness is promised, when the Lord can impute no sin. Iniquity, indeed, has this difference from sin, that iniquity is spoken of in those matters which are committed against the law; whence the Greek term calls iniquity anomian (lawlessness), that is, what is committed without law; but that too can be called sin, if the offense is committed against what nature teaches and conscience reproves.

What is forgiven is not retained in the mind, and what is covered does not come to light, and for that reason it is not counted against us.

And concerning the happiness of the man who has partaken of these, David says: "Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin." For, strictly speaking, there cannot any longer be reckoned ought against the martyrs, by whom in the baptism (of blood) life itself is laid down.

For if he who receives forgiveness by grace is blessed, then far more blessed is he who has shown faith and been justified by it. Why, he says, do you hesitate over the fact that he receives forgiveness of sins by grace? You see that he who has received remission by grace is called blessed; for the prophet would not have called him blessed if he did not know that he possesses great glory: for blessedness is something exceedingly important and higher than righteousness itself; it is the summit of all the good things we receive from God.

Then when he says, blessed are they, he presents David's words containing the previous judgment and says that those whose sins are forgiven are blessed; consequently, they did not previously have good works, from which they obtained justice or happiness.

But sin is divided into three classes: original, actual mortal, and actual venial.

First, in regard to original sin he says: blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven.

Here it should be noted that original sin is called iniquity, because it is the lack of that original justice, by which in equity man's reason was subject to God, the lower powers to reason, and the body to the soul. This equity is removed by original sin, because after reason ceased to be subject to God, the lower powers rebel against reason and the body is withdrawn from obedience to the soul and subjected to decay and death. Hence: I was brought forth in iniquities (Ps 51:5).

In both texts original sin is presented in the plural, either because of the multitude of men in whom original sin is multiplied or better because it virtually contains within itself all sins in some way.

Such original sin is said to be forgiven, because the state of guilt passes with the coming of grace, but the effect remains in the form of fomes, or concupiscence, which is not entirely taken away in this life, but is remitted or mitigated.

Second, in regard to actual mortal sin he says, and whose sins are covered.

For sins are said to be covered from the divine gaze, inasmuch as he does not look upon them to be punished: you covered all their sin (Ps 84:3).

"Forgive," "cover," "not reckon"—all amount to one and the same thing. For all three are given and received in the same way.Paul has three categories to cover the different types of sin. The first category is that of wickedness or ungodliness, in that the Creator is not acknowledged. The second category is that of the more serious sins, and the third is that of the less serious ones. All of these are wiped out in baptism.

"Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin."

And he does not say this "forgiveness" then comes upon the circumcision; but what saith he? "Cometh this blessedness then" (which is the greater thing) "upon the circumcision or upon the uncircumcision?" For now the subject of enquiry is, With whom is this good and great thing to be found; is it with the circumcision or with the uncircumcision? And notice its superiority! For he shows that it is so far from shunning the uncircumcision, that it even dwelt gladly with it before the circumcision.

Some people say that sin is forgiven in baptism, covered by penitential works and through martyrdom not counted against us. But others say that when sins have been forgiven in baptism, love for God is increased, which covers a multitude of sins and keeps them from being counted against us as long as daily good works surpass past misdeeds.

Sinful works are not counted against the faithful. God's love of humanity is the greatest thing that has happened.

Third, in regard to venial sin he says, blessed is the man to whom the Lord has not imputed sin, where sin refers to venial sins which, although light, if they be many, man is separated and distant from God: the good Lord will pardon everyone who sets his heart to seek God, even though not according to the sanctuary's rules of cleanness (2 Chr 30:18).

These three can be distinguished in another way.

For in sin are three things, one of which is offense against God. In regard to this he says, blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, the way man is said to remit an offense committed against him: her iniquity is pardoned (Isa 40:2).

The second thing is the fact that the disordered deed has been done and cannot be said not to have occurred, once it has been perpetrated; but it is covered over by the hand of God's mercy and is held as if not committed.

The third is the debt of punishment, in regard to which he says, blessed is the man to whom the Lord has not imputed sin, i.e., unto punishment.

Is this blessedness given to the children of Abraham only or to the Gentiles also? If in those days the Gentiles were not forbidden to come under the law and the promise made to Abraham, how could it be that in the time of Christ they should be prevented from coming to grace, when God has clearly invited them?

For now the subject of enquiry is, With whom is this good and great thing to be found; is it with the circumcision or with the uncircumcision? And notice its superiority! For he shows that it is so far from shunning the uncircumcision, that it even dwelt gladly with it before the circumcision. For since he that pronounced it blessed was David, who was himself also in a state of circumcision, and he was speaking to those in that state, see how eagerly Paul contends for applying what he said to the uncircumcised. For after joining the ascription of blessedness to righteousness, and showing that they are one and the same thing, he enquires how Abraham came to be righteous. For if the ascription of blessedness belong to the righteous, and Abraham was made righteous, let us see how he was made righteous, as uncircumcised or circumcised? Uncircumcised, he says.

"For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness."

After mentioning the Scripture above (for he said, "What saith the Scripture? Abraham believed in God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness,") here he goes on to secure also the judgment of the speakers, and shows that justification took place in the uncircumcision. Then from these grounds he solves another objection which is starting up. For if when in uncircumcision, one might say he was justified, to what purpose was the circumcision brought in?

"Is this blessedness then upon the circumcision, or also upon the uncircumcision? For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham unto justice. How then was it reckoned? When he was in circumcision, or when he was in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the justice of the faith which is in uncircumcision: that he might be the father of all who believe through uncircumcision, so that it might be reckoned to them also unto justice, and that he might be the father of circumcision, not only to those who are of the circumcision, but also to those who follow the footsteps of the faith of our father Abraham, which he had in uncircumcision." Having said above that "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him unto justice," and having shown from the things written in the thirty-first psalm what blessedness a faith of this kind possesses — namely that to one who so believes the Lord would not reckon sin — he now puts forward a question, from the answer to which he may teach, and from the very reckoning of the times, that the blessedness of Abraham's justification was given not in circumcision, but while he was still placed in uncircumcision. But if Abraham, while he was still in uncircumcision, was justified by faith, then everyone also who believes God can be justified through faith, even if he be in uncircumcision, and this blessedness of which it is said, "Blessed is he to whom the Lord has not imputed sin," can pertain to him also. He shows, therefore, that the Lord does not refrain from imputing sin to just anyone, but that to him who has believed he does not reckon sins on account of his faith. For just as faith was reckoned to Abraham unto justice, so also to every believer to whom faith is reckoned unto justice, sins are assuredly not imputed. For he does not say of the just that faith is reckoned to them unto justice. And if it were so supposed, what grace would there appear to be in reckoning it to a just man? Justice unto justice? But surely he says that faith was reckoned unto justice to him who, before he had this faith, did not have justice; and this is assuredly the blessed man, to whom God credits justice apart from works, and to whom sin is not imputed, to whom also iniquities are forgiven, and covered over are whatever sins there previously were. And at the same time he also teaches us to attend more diligently to the reading, since he expounds so vigilantly the things written concerning Abraham, that "faith was reckoned to him unto justice." He wants us to consider also when it was reckoned, so that from what is written the reckoning of the time may also be gathered, whether he was still in uncircumcision when these things were said, or whether he had already passed over to circumcision; and he says: "How then was his faith reckoned unto justice? When he was in circumcision, or when he was in uncircumcision?" For if at that time he had been in circumcision, uncircumcision would certainly have seemed to be excluded from the grace of this faith. But as it is, he shows that faith was reckoned unto justice while he was still placed in uncircumcision, and therefore he declares that, since Abraham was justified through faith while placed in uncircumcision, he is without doubt rightly called the chief and father of all who believe through uncircumcision.

Paul means that the blessing is to be found in each of the three periods of nature, circumcision and Christian faith. Everyone agrees that faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness. Therefore, what reason discovers about Abraham, we will heed with regard to the rest.

If, he says, blessedness belongs to the one whom the Lord does not impute sin to, that is, to the one who is justified, and Abraham was justified, then he most certainly received blessedness.

Then when he says, this blessedness then, he excludes a false interpretation of the text.

For a Jew could interpret it as meaning that the grace of forgiveness of sins is conferred only on the circumcised.

Therefore, to exclude this the Apostle first raises the question, this blessedness then, by which God confers justice without works, does it remain in the circumcised only, i.e., does it affect only the circumcised, or in the uncircumcision also, i.e., on the gentiles? Plainly it is for both, according to what he says below: the same Lord is riches unto all that call upon him (Rom 10:12).

Second, at for we say, to show this he appeals to the authority of Scripture (Gen 15:6), as if to say: I ask this, for we say that unto Abraham faith was reputed to justice.

What did Abraham believe? He believed that he would have a descendant, a son, in whom all the nations would be justified by faith while they were still uncircumcised, as Abraham then was.

"How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision?"

For since he that pronounced it blessed was David, who was himself also in a state of circumcision, and he was speaking to those in that state, see how eagerly Paul contends for applying what he said to the uncircumcised. For after joining the ascription of blessedness to righteousness, and showing that they are one and the same thing, he enquires how Abraham came to be righteous. For if the ascription of blessedness belong to the righteous, and Abraham was made righteous, let us see how he was made righteous, as uncircumcised or circumcised? Uncircumcised, he says.

Now we must see whether circumcision is born of righteousness or righteousness of circumcision. It must be the former, because Abraham was righteous before he was circumcised.

Paul demonstrates that faith was not only older than the law, it was older than circumcision as well.

Let us see, then, when he was justified: before circumcision or after circumcision? Of course, before circumcision. Therefore, blessedness falls upon uncircumcision, that is, it belongs more to uncircumcision than to circumcision.

Third, from this text he concludes to the answer, although he states it in the form of a question: how then was it reputed to him, namely, Abraham's faith as justice; that is, when he was in circumcision, i.e., when he was circumcised, or in uncircumcision, i.e., when still uncircumcised?

He answers: not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. This is obvious from the reported sequence of events. For Genesis reports that faith was reckoned to Abraham as justice (Gen 15:6), but the fact of receiving circumcision is not recorded until Genesis (17:23 et seq.). Therefore, if Abraham, still uncircumcised, was justified by faith, it is plain that the justice of faith, through which sins are forgiven gratis, occurs not only in circumcision but also in uncircumcision, i.e., in gentiles.

Abraham received circumcision as a sign of the righteousness of faith. For believing that he would have a son, he received the sign of the thing which he believed, that it might be known that he was justified because of what he believed. Circumcision has no special value; it is just a sign. The children of Abraham received this sign so that it would be known that they were the children of him who had received this sign because he believed in God and so that they would imitate their father's faith and believe in Jesus, who was promised to Abraham. Isaac was born as a type of Christ, for the nations are not blessed in Isaac but in Christ, "for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved," says the apostle Peter.

Paul taught us both that Abraham received circumcision as a sign and that while he was still uncircumcised he gave evidence of righteousness arising from faith.

See you how he shows the Jews to be as it were of the class of parasites (i.e. guests), rather than those in uncircumcision, and that these were added to the others? For if he was justified and crowned while in uncircumcision, the Jews came in afterwards, Abraham is then the father first of the uncircumcised, which through faith appertain to him, and then of those in the circumcision. For he is a forefather of two lines. See you faith lightening up? for till it came the patriarch was not justified. See you the uncircumcision offering no hindrance? for he was uncircumcised, yet was not hindered from being justified. The circumcision therefore is behind the faith. And why wonder that it is behind the faith, when it is even behind the uncircumcision. Nor is it behind faith only, but very far inferior to it, even so far as the sign is to the reality of which it is the sign; for instance, as the seal is to the soldier. And why, he says, did he want a seal then? He did not want it himself. For what purpose then did he receive it? With a view to his being the father alike of them that believe in uncircumcision and in circumcision. But not of those in circumcision absolutely: wherefore he goes on to say, "To them who are not of the circumcision only." For if to the uncircumcised, it is not in that he is uncircumcised that he is their father, although justified in uncircumcision; but in that they imitated his faith; much less is it owing to circumcision that he is the forefather of those in the state of circumcision, unless faith also be added.

But as to the fact that after the faith which he had in uncircumcision he received circumcision, he consequently sets forth the reason for which circumcision was given him. It was, he says, that it might be the seal of that faith which he had while placed in uncircumcision, so that through this "he might be the father of all who believe through uncircumcision, that it might be reckoned to them unto justice, and that he might be the father of circumcision, not only to those who are of the circumcision, but also to those who follow the footsteps of the faith of our father Abraham, which he had in uncircumcision." But if Abraham, while he was still in uncircumcision, was justified by faith, he can become also the father of those who are born in circumcision, provided that they belong to that faith which justified him while placed in uncircumcision. And since it justified Abraham while placed in uncircumcision, he is therefore made the father of both kinds: of those who are in uncircumcision through faith, and of those who are in circumcision through the flesh; and after circumcision he begets first Isaac, and from him takes the beginning of the ogdoad, that is, in him the first mysteries of the eighth day are consecrated, and from that point the posterity of Abraham begins to run by a twofold sacrament. For just as faith is understood by its own nature to be one thing, and the justice which was reckoned to him through faith another; so also his posterity in uncircumcision is one thing, and his posterity in circumcision another. For those who are uncircumcised, these I think are the stones of which God is said to be able to raise up sons of Abraham, in whom that also is fulfilled which is written: that "in you shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed." But let us take up again what he says: "And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the justice of the faith which is in uncircumcision," and let us contemplate Paul's profound wisdom in these words. For perhaps to some he may seem to say the same word twice, that is, "sign" and "seal." But to me the two words seem to have much difference between them. For a thing is called a sign when through what is seen something else is indicated: as when, for example, the Lord says in the Gospel: "This generation seeks a sign, and a sign shall not be given it, except the sign of Jonah the prophet. For as Jonah was in the belly of the whale three days and three nights, so must the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights." This, then, is a sign, where Jonah was seen and Christ was understood. Similarly it is said of the Lord himself in the Gospel: "Behold, this one is set for the fall and the rising of many, and for a sign that shall be contradicted." For the sign in which Christ had come was contradicted, because one thing was seen in him and another understood. Flesh was discerned, and God was believed. So then Abraham also received a sign; and what the sign was he states in what follows: "Circumcision," he says — which circumcision was "the seal of the justice of the faith" which he had before he was circumcised. Rightly then did he call circumcision a sign in Abraham, because in it too one thing was seen and another understood; and he shows that even then that fleshly circumcision was a sign of the spiritual circumcision, "which is not received in the flesh, but in the heart." But as to his saying "seal," I think it is to be understood thus. A seal is spoken of when a guard is imposed for a time upon something to be kept safe, which no one else but the very one who impressed it ought to unseal. Through this seal, then, as the Apostle expounds, there is indicated the justice of the faith which Abraham, placed in uncircumcision, deserved to receive, and that he is the father of many nations: which we believe will then be unsealed when the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, and all Israel shall be saved. For then shall come about what the Apostle says, that Abraham is the father not only of the Gentiles, but also of the circumcision through faith.

And let us discuss the sign and the seal still more plainly. Since a sign, as we have said, is where something is indicated by that which is seen, whereas a seal is where something is enclosed for a time and does not lie open, it can also be understood in this way: that the mysteries which were foreshadowed in the law and in the patriarchs were of such a kind that they had both to be indicated by signs and to be kept guarded by seals. Therefore, inasmuch as they were to be indicated by signs among those who would believe from the Gentiles, Abraham is said to have received a sign; but inasmuch as, for those in the circumcision who were not going to believe, they had to be kept guarded and covered over, he is said to have received a seal. And that seal will assuredly be unsealed at that time when, in the last days — after the fullness of the Gentiles, as we have said, has come in — all Israel shall be saved. And this, finally, is why Abraham is first justified in faith while he was still uncircumcised, and afterward is circumcised: so that he might be shown to be first the father of many nations, and afterward of those who were to believe from the circumcision. For those who are born of Abraham according to the flesh are not to be called sons of Abraham unless they have the faith and the works of Abraham. Hence, finally, the Lord too says in the Gospel to the Jews who were boasting that they were sons of Abraham: "If you were sons of Abraham, you would surely do the works of Abraham." But do you wish to be fully taught from the Old Scripture as well that a person is called the son not only of him from whose carnal seed he is descended, but also of him whose deeds and works he imitates? Hear what Daniel says to one of those elders whom he convicts of adultery: "O seed," he says, "of Canaan, and not of Judah, beauty has seduced you, and lust has overturned your heart." You see that he who according to the flesh was descended from the race of Judah is denied to be a son of Judah, but is called a son of Canaan — of him, namely, whose deeds and works he was following. So therefore those also who trace their descent from the seed of Abraham according to the flesh are not called sons of Abraham, if they do not have his faith. So too, finally, the prophet says to them: "Your father was an Amorite, and your mother a Hittite" — to whom assuredly it was not kinship of race that joined them, but likeness of character. "That he might be," he says, "the father of all who believe through uncircumcision, that it might be reckoned to them unto righteousness; and that he might be the father of circumcision, not only to those who are of the circumcision, but also to those who follow the footsteps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had in uncircumcision." In which he plainly declares, with regard to each people, as we said above, that it is not origin of flesh but distinction of faith that is to be sought. But concerning the sacrament of circumcision we have already spoken more fully in the passages above, and we have also expounded it in several other places as the matter and the occasion seemed to require. Yet the diligent reader, "whom not one iota or one tittle of the law escapes," ought not to be unaware of this either: that as regards what the Apostle said, "His faith was reckoned to Abraham unto righteousness," at that time when it was written of him that he believed God and it was reckoned to him unto righteousness, he was not yet called Abraham, but Abram was his name. For he still remained uncircumcised, as the Apostle explains. On which point it will perhaps seem to some that there is an error in the copies, since "Abraham" could easily have been written for "Abram." But since this supposition is uncertain rather than a firm proof, let us answer more concisely: that the Apostle, observing the sentence of God who said, "No longer shall Abram, but Abraham shall be your name," now called him not as it is written in the passage of Genesis, but as God pronounced concerning him. For what is divinely established, it is fitting should be observed thereafter. These things, brought forward as best we could in passages so steep and so difficult, anyone will be able to accept if he considers the earnestness of our purpose; but if he wishes to mark the weakness of our understanding, we ask pardon, and we gladly yield to one who may be able to discuss or explain these things better. But we, with however sluggish a step, turn our foot toward what follows.

In case anyone says that Abraham was circumcised unnecessarily, Paul argues that it is the sign or seal of an existing righteousness, not of growth in an unfolding righteousness. This righteousness was so perfect that it deserved a seal, for something that is full is always sealed.

Circumcision was given for these three reasons: First, to be a sign of faith; second, to mark out the race of Abraham, and third, to be a sign and symbol of good and wise behavior. It was not given in order to produce righteousness but as a sign and seal of the righteousness which was Abraham's by faith.

But Abraham, (you say,) was circumcised. Yes, but he pleased God before his circumcision; nor yet did he observe the Sabbath. For he had "accepted" circumcision; but such as was to be for "a sign" of that time, not for a prerogative title to salvation. In fact, subsequent patriarchs were uncircumcised, like Melchizedek, who, uncircumcised, offered to Abraham himself, already circumcised, on his return from battle, bread and wine.

But how are we children of faith? and of whose faith, if not Abraham's? For since "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness; " since, also, he deserved for that reason to be called "the father of many nations," whilst we, who are even more like him in believing in God, are thereby justified as Abraham was, and thereby also obtain life-since the just lives by his faith,-it therefore happens that, as he in the previous passage called us "sons of Abraham," since he is in faith our (common) father, so here also he named us "children of faith," for it was owing to his faith that it was promised that Abraham should be the father of (many) nations.

For, albeit comeliness is not to be censured, as being a bodily happiness, as being an additional outlay of the divine plastic art, as being a kind of goodly garment of the soul; yet it is to be feared, just on account of the injuriousness and violence of suitors: which (injuriousness and violence) even the father of the faith, Abraham, greatly feared in regard of his own wife's grace; and Isaac, by falsely representing Rebecca as his sister, purchased safety by insult!

For albeit it is subsequently that he is called "a father of many nations," still it is of those (nations) who, as the fruit of the "faith" which precedes digamy, had to be accounted "sons of Abraham."

He resolves a naturally arising objection. Someone might perhaps object: if Abraham was justified before circumcision, then why was he circumcised? The Apostle answers: he "received the sign of circumcision" — in place of a seal, confirming that he was justified by faith, which he demonstrated earlier, while being uncircumcised. So, regarding Abraham, two things are presented: uncircumcision and circumcision. Through uncircumcision he proves to be the father of the uncircumcised. But which ones? Those who, like him, believe, "that righteousness might be imputed to them also," that is, so that they too might be justified.

Having shown that the blessing of forgiveness of sins is obtained not only in circumcision but also in uncircumcision on the ground that Abraham was justified when he was still uncircumcised, the Apostle now responds to an objection.

For someone could say: if Abraham was justified before circumcision, then he was circumcised without reason and for no purpose.

To exclude this objection,

he first states that circumcision was not the cause but the sign of justice;

second, he shows what he obtains from this sign, at that he might be the father;

third, how he obtains it, at not to those only.

In regard to the first he does two things. First, he states that circumcision is a sign: you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin and it shall be a sign of the covenant between you and me (Gen 17:10).

Second, he shows what it is a sign of, saying: a seal of the justice of the faith, i.e., the justice that comes through faith, which faith is in uncircumcision, i.e., which Abraham had while he was still uncircumcised.

Seal is said in two ways. In one way, a seal is a visible sign possessing a likeness to the thing signified, as in Ezekiel: you were the seal of likeness, full of wisdom (Ezek 28:12). Circumcision had this visible likeness to Abraham's faith. First, in regard to what he believed. For Abraham believed that his seed would be multiplied; hence, it was fitting to receive its sign in the organ of reproduction. Second, in regard to the effect of his faith, namely, the removal of fault, and this is signified by the removal of superfluous skin.

In another way, seal means a sign hiding something which is to be revealed to friends, as is clear in the case of a sigillo: worthy are you, who were slain, to take the scroll and to open its seals (Rev 6:9). Hence, the secret of the Incarnation of Christ from the seed of Abraham was enclosed under the seal of circumcision.

Then he shows what follows from what has been said.

For Abraham, still uncircumcised, was justified by faith and later received circumcision. From this he obtains the honor of being the father not only of the circumcised but also of uncircumcised believers. And this is what he says: that he might be the father, i.e., from the foregoing it comes about that Abraham might be the father of all those who believe, being uncircumcised, i.e., who are in the state of uncircumcision. Or Abraham is the father through uncircumcision, i.e., in virtue of what he had in uncircumcision, that unto them also it may be reputed to justice, namely, the fact that they believe, just as it was reckoned to Abraham. The power of this fatherhood is indicated in Matthew: God is able from these stones to raise up children to Abraham (Matt 3:9). And he might be the father of circumcision, who derive their origin from him: Abraham is our father (John 8:39).

Since we are speaking of circumcision, it is fitting to consider three things about it, namely, why it was instituted, what power it had, and why it was changed.

In regard to the first it should be noted that circumcision, just as the other ceremonies of the law, was instituted for two purposes.

First, for divine worship, for which men were disposed in accordance with these ceremonies.

In keeping with this, circumcision had three reasons for being instituted, the first of which was to signify the faith and obedience by which Abraham submitted to God, so that those who accepted the circumcision of Abraham should observe his faith and obedience. For it is stated in Hebrews: by faith Abraham was circumcised (Heb 4:11). Hence, circumcision was instituted to signify his faith in future descendants, as has been stated.

The second reason was to express in a bodily sign something that was to occur spiritually, namely, just as superfluous skin was removed from the organ of reproduction, which is the chief servant of concupiscence, so every superfluous desire should be removed from man's heart, as Jeremiah says: circumcise yourself to the Lord, remove the foreskin of your hearts (Jer 4:4).

The third reason was to distinguish the people worshipping God from all other people. This is why God commanded circumcision for the children of Israel, who were to dwell among the other nations after first living alone and uncircumcised in the desert.

The other purpose of circumcision and all the ceremonies is based on a relation to Christ, to whom they are compared as the figure to the reality and as the members to the body: these are only a shadow of what is to come, but the body belongs to Christ (Col 2:17).

Accordingly, by bodily circumcision is signified the spiritual circumcision to be accomplished by Christ: first in the soul, inasmuch as it is through him that concupiscence and the effects of sin are removed by Christ: in him, namely, Christ, also you were circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ (Col 2:11).

Second, in regard to the body, namely, when in the resurrection all possibility of suffering and death is removed from the bodies of the elect. Hence, circumcision took place on the eighth day, because it signified the eighth era. For the seventh is the era of those who are at rest in Christ, while the other six are the eras during which the world runs its course. Again, circumcision was done with knives of stone (Josh 5:2) to signify that spiritual circumcision was to be effected by the rock, who is Christ, as is said (1 Cor 10:4). However, it was not the general practice to use a knife made of stone.

In regard to the second question, namely, what power circumcision had, it should be noted that, as the Gloss says here—the quotation is taken from Bede—during the law, circumcision offered the same curative help against the wound of original sin as baptism is wont to give in the era of revealed grace. This shows that the power of circumcision extended to the removal of original sin.

However, some say that grace was not conferred in circumcision; for without justice God's grace cannot be present. But the Apostle says in Galatians: if justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose (Gal 2:21).

And we can argue in the same way: if justifying grace were through circumcision, Christ died to no purpose. But this cannot be, for sin is never forgiven without grace: justified by his grace we have peace with God (Titus 3:7).

Therefore, others say that grace was conferred in circumcision to produce privative effects, namely, to remove guilt, but not positive effects, namely, the work of justice.

But this does not seem fitting either, for the positive effects of any form precede in the order of nature the privative effects; for example, light does not expel darkness except by illuminating. Similarly, grace expels guilt by producing justice. But if the prior is removed, the subsequent is removed.

Therefore, it is better to say that ex opere operato circumcision did not have effective power either to remove guilt or to produce justice. It was merely a sign of justice, as the Apostle says here. But through faith in Christ, of which circumcision was a sign, it removed original sin and conferred the help of grace to act righteously.

In regard to the third question, it is clear from what has been said, why circumcision had to be changed. For it was a sign of something to come. But the same sign does not suit the present, past, and future. Therefore, baptism, as the sign of present grace, produces a more copious and more beneficial effect of grace, because the closer the agent is in time and place, the more effectively it works.

Paul says this because Abraham by believing became the forefather of the circumcision, but of the heart, not only of those who descended from him but also of those who, from among the nations, believed in the way he did. He is the father of the Jews according to the flesh, but according to faith he is the father of all believers.

Now, this Jesus did by drawing us off from the religion of stones, and bringing us over from hard and fruitless cogitations, and establishing in us a faith like to Abraham. As Paul does also testify, saying that we are children of Abraham because of the similarity of our faith, and the promise of inheritance.

Here again he lays low the lofty spirit of the Jews by reminding them of the time of the justification. And he well says, "the steps," that you as well as Abraham may believe in the resurrection of bodies that are dead. For he also displayed his faith upon this point. And so if you reject the uncircumcision, be informed for certain that the circumcision is of no more use unto you. For if you follow not in the steps of his faith, though you were ten thousand times in a state of circumcision, you will not be Abraham's offspring. For even he received the circumcision for this end, that the man in a state of uncircumcision might not cast thee off. Do not then demand this of him too. For it was you whom the thing was to be an assistance to, not he. But he calls it a sign of the righteousness. And this also was for thy sake, since now it is not even this: for thou then wert in need of bodily signs, but now there is no need of them.

Therefore all the Gentiles who believe are children of Abraham when faith alone is credited to them as righteousness and they too receive the circumcision—of the heart. Or perhaps this verse should be understood like this: Abraham was righteous in uncircumcision so that he could become the father of uncircumcised believers, and he remained righteous once he was circumcised in order to become the father of the righteous who are circumcised.

If a Gentile who has not been circumcised follows Abraham's faith, which he manifested before being circumcised, he will not be rejected. For the God of all, since he had foreseen as God that he would gather one people from both Jews and Gentiles and prepare for them salvation by faith, had appointed Abraham as their father as well. Paul had demonstrated that Abraham had acquired righteousness by faith before being circumcised and that even after being circumcised he lived not according to the law of Moses but by clinging to his faith. Hence Paul called him the father of the Gentiles who believe.

Through circumcision Abraham proves to be the father of "the circumcision," that is, of the circumcised. Yet he is the father not only of those who have circumcision, but also of those who walk in the footsteps of the faith that he had while in uncircumcision. So, the present passage must be read thus: he became the father of the circumcised not for those who resemble him in circumcision alone, but for those who walk in the footsteps of his faith, that is, who like him believe in the resurrection of dead bodies. For in old age and in deadness he believed that God could make his seed fruitful and give him a son. The complete thought is this: Abraham, being uncircumcised, believed and was justified, so that in this way he might become the father of believing uncircumcised ones. On the other hand, he received circumcision, a seal and sign of the faith which was in uncircumcision, so as to become the father of the circumcised who walk, of course, in the footsteps of his faith which he had while not yet circumcised. As long as this faith is absent, circumcision boasts in vain, imitating one who shows a purse to which only a seal has been affixed, but in which there is nothing. So then, the Jew is a purse sealed by circumcision, but not having the faith whose seal is circumcision.

Then he shows the manner in which he is the father even of the uncircumcised, namely, by imitation. And this is what he says: that he might be the father . . . not to those only who are of the circumcision, but to those also who follow the steps of the faith that is in the uncircumcision of our father Abraham, i.e., which Abraham had, while he was still uncircumcised: if you were Abraham's children, you would do what Abraham did (John 8:39).