A17643:703
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.
namely, that God could see nothing in the corrupt nature of man, such as was in Esau and Jacob, whereby he might be moved to do good. Therefore when he saith, that both of them had then done neither good nor evil, it is also to be added which he presumeth: namely that both of them were the sons of Adam, by nature sinners, endued with no crumb of righteousness. Neither do I therefore stand so long in expounding these, as though the mind of the Apostle were doubtful: but because the Sophisters not being content with the simplicity thereof, go about by their frivolous distinctions to creep out hence, my meaning was to show, that Paul was not ignorant of those things they bring: but that they rather are blind in the first principles of religion. Moreover, although the corruption of nature, which is dispersed over all mankind, before it come (as they say) into action, is available enough unto condemnation, whereby followeth that Esau was worthily rejected, because naturally he was the Son of wrath: yet least any doubt should remain, as though through respect of any fault or sin his condition was the worse, it was necessary as well sins as virtues should be excluded.
namely, that God could see nothing in the corrupt nature of man, such as was in Esau and Iacob, whereby he might be moued to doe good. Therefore when he saith, that both of them had then done neither good nor euil, it is also to be added which he presumeth: namely that both of them were the sonnes of Adam, by nature sinners, indued with no crumme of righteousnesse. Neither doe I therefore stand so long in expounding these, as though the minde of the Apostle were doubtfull: but because the Sophisters not being cōtent with ye simplicitie therof, goe about by their friuolous distinctions to creepe out hence, my meaning was to shew, that Paule was not ignoraunt of those thinges they bring: but that they rather are blinde in the first principles of religiō. Moreouer, although the corruption of nature, which is dispersed ouer all mankynde, before it come (as they say) into action, is auayleable enough vnto condemnation, wherby followeth that Esau was woorthely reiected, because naturally he was the sonne of wrath: yet least anye doubt should remayne, as though through respect of any fault or sinne his condition was the woorse, it was necessary as well sinnes as vertues should be excluded.