A17643:1043
Commentary upon the Epistle to the Romans
A commentary upon the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Romans, written in Latin by M. John Calvin, and newly translated into English by Christopher Rosdell preacher. Whereunto is added a necessary table for the better and more ready finding out of certain principal matters contained in this workA commentarie vpon the Epistle of Saint Paul to the Romanes, written in Latine by M. Iohn Caluin, and newely translated into Englishe by Christopher Rosdell preacher. Whereunto is added a necessarie table for the better and more readie finding out of certayne principall matters conteyned in this worke
London: printed by Thomas Dawson for John Harison and George Bishop, 1583London: printed by Thomas Dawson for Iohn Harison and George Bishop, 1583
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Howbeit because of late he required the certainty of mind, least every one should rashly take upon him the keeping of this or that at his pleasure, we are to consider if he do not here rather exhort then affirm: because this way the Text shall run better, namely, let every man know the ground or reason of that he doth, for he must give account at the tribunal seat of God. For whether a man eat meat, or abstain, he ought in both to have respect unto GOD. And certainly there is nothing more apt, as well to restrain the liberty of judging, as to correct superstitions, then to cite us before the tribunal seat of God: and therefore Paul very wisely doth propose a Judge before every one, unto whose will they ought to refer or examine, whatsoever they do. Neither doth the affirmative speech let this acception: because straightway after he addeth, that no man liveth or dieth to himself, where he reciteth not, what men can do, but commandeth what they ought to do.
Howbeit because of late he required the certaintie of minde, least euery one shoulde rashly take vppon him the keeping of this or that at his pleasure, we are to consider if he doe not here rather exhort then affirme: because this waye the Text shall runne better, namely, let euerie manne knowe the grounde or reason of that he doth, for hee must giue account at the tribunall seate of God. For whether a man eate meate, or absteine, he ought in both to haue respecte vnto GOD. And certainely there is nothing more apt, as well to restrayne the libertie of iudging, as to correct superstitions, then to cite vs before the tribunall seate of God: and therefore Paule very wisely doth propose a Iudge before euerye one, vnto whose will they ought to referre or examine, whatsoeuer they doe. Neyther doth the affirmatiue speeche let this acception: because straightway after he addeth, that no man liueth or dieth to himselfe, where he reciteth not, what men can doe, but commaundeth what they ought to doe.
And note that he saith we then eat and abstain to the Lord, when we give thanks. Wherefore both the use of meats & also abstinence is impure without thanksgiving. It is only the name of God, which, whiles it is called upon, doeth sanctify us and ours.