Commentary upon the Epistle to the Romans

I Demand then. &c. That which he hath hitherto said of the cecity & obstinacy of the Jews, might seem to tend unto this, as though Christ by his coming had translated the promises else where, the Jews being put out from all hope of salvation. Therefore he preventeth that objection in this place: and so moderateth that he had said before of the rejection of the Jews, that no man should think the covenant which GOD made in old time with Abraham, was now abrogated: or that God had so forgotten it, that the Jews now should be utterly estranged from his kingdom, as the Gentiles were before the coming of Christ. He denieth that, and will surely straightways show it to be false. Neither is this the question, whether God hath rightly, or unrightly rejected his people. For in the former Chapter it hath been proved, that when the people through a preposterous zeal did reject the righteousness of God, being justly punished for their pride, they were worthily blinded, and at length cut off from the covenant. So that now the cause of their rejection is not in disputation: but the question is of another matter, namely, although they have deserved such vengeance of God, whether yet the covenant which God made in old time with the fathers, be abolished, which covenant, that it should through any infidelity of men be overthrown, were absurd. For Paul retaineth this principle, seeing the adoption of God is free, & is founded upon God only, & not upon men, it doeth stand firm, what incredulity soever of men conspire to overthrow it: this knot must be loosed, least the truth and election of God should be thought to depend upon the dignity of men. For I my self am an Israelite. Before he enter into the cause, by the way he proveth in his own example, how absurd it is to think that nation is utterly forsaken of GOD. For he was an Israelite from the first beginning, not a proselyte,¹ or newly received into the common wealth of Israel. And seeing he was worthily counted amongest ⟨p. 146⟩the special servants of God, it is an argument that the grace of God did rest in Israel. He therefore taketh the conclusion as proved, which yet he will afterward open by a necessary discourse.

I Demande then. &c. That which he hath hitherto said of the cecitie & obstinacie of the Iewes, might seeme to tend vnto this, as though Christ by his cōming had translated the promises els where, the Iewes beeing put out from all hope of saluation. Therefore he preuenteth that obiection in this place: and so moderateth that hee had said before of the reiection of the Iewes, that no man should thinke the couenant which GOD made in old time with Abraham, was nowe abrogated: or that God had so forgotten it, that the Iewes now should be vtterly estranged from his kingdome, as the Gentiles were before the comming of Christ. Hee denieth that, and will surely straightwayes shewe it to bee false. Neither is this the question, whether God hath rightly, or vnrightly reiected his people. For in the former Chapter it hath been proued, that when the people through a preposterous zeale did reiect the righteousnes of God, being iustly punished for their pride, they were worthily blinded, and at length cut off from the couenant. So that now the cause of their reiection is not in disputation: but the question is of another matter, namely, although they haue deserued such vengeance of God, whether yet the couenant which God made in old time with the fathers, be abolished, which couenant, that it should through anie infidelitie of men be ouerthrown, were absurd. For Paul reteineth this principle, seeing the adoption of God is free, & is founded vppon God only, & not vppon men, it doeth stand firme, what incredulitie soeuer of men conspire to ouerthrow it: this knot must be loosed, least the truth and election of God should be thought to depende vpon the dignitie of men. For I my selfe am an Israelite. Before hee enter into the cause, by the way hee prooueth in his owne example, howe absurde it is to thinke that nation is vtterly forsaken of GOD. For he was an Israelite from the firste beginning, not a proselite,