THE .EPISTLB ,0 E R
J A' . S,

LIBRARY ST. A"A:!Y'S COLLEGE

.7

.

THE
EPISTLE TO THE ROl\lANS

FIRST EDITION
Reþrin/ed
Reþrin/ed
Reþritlled

. February
1899.
. . March, 1900.
. Seþtember, 1900.
. . October, lÇ)O.l.

1,'
to

'1.\

St. Pa1JI's
Eþistle to the R oman

A Practical Exþosz.tio1z

BY THE

-RIGHT REV,; CHARLES GORE, 'i)..D.
'0
LORD BISHOP OF WORCESTER

VOL. I

(CHAPTERS I-VIII)

93303

LONDON

JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET, W.

19 02

LIDRARY ST. ^
ARY'S COLLEGE

Ð
fot

HORACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY

40--1
c'

PREFACE

. .

A GOOD excuse is needed for adding to the
large number of excellent commentaries on the
Epistle to the Romans which already exist. But
I think there is such an excuse. These com-
mentaries are not of the sort which readers who
are educated but not scholarly find it easy to
master; so that in fact this epistle is at the
present day very much misunderstood or ignored
by such people. And again, partly owing to its
interpretation at the period of the Reformation
and by some Evangelicals of later date, it is
still practically to a great extent viewed \vith
discomfort and neglected by those who most
value the name of Catholic. My excuse, then,
for adding to the expositions of the Romans lies
in these facts. One who is necessarily immersed
in the practical work of the Christian ministry,
and is yet struggling to keep himself in some
sense in line with biblical scholarship, if his life
involves special disadvantages, may yet hope to
be useful in interpreting to ordinary Christians

\'1

Preface

the results of the scholars. And I am persuaded
that it requires one ,vho enters thoroughly into
the spirit of churchma
ship, or the obligation of
the one body, to interpret \vith any completeness
the mind of 51. Paul.
This volume has practically no more con-
nexion with lectures delivered in Westminster
Abbey last I...ent, than is implied in its being an
exposition of the same epistle by the same
person.
The method of exposition in this volume is
the same as that pursued in its predecessor on
the Epistle to the Ephesians. After a general
introduction, each section of the Revised Version
is taken, or ìn some cases two sections are
taken together, and prefaced by an analysis or
paraphrase, as seems most useful, and follo,ved
by further explanation of the main ideas or
phrases which each section contains.
The' appended notes' I have been obliged to
defer to the end of the second volume-which,
I hope, 'v ill appear within a year-with a vie\v
of approximately equalizing the size of the two
volun1es.

CHARLES GORE.

WESTl\IINSTER ABBEY,
Conversion of St. Paul, 1899-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

. .

PAGE

INTRODUCTION.
_ (i) Origin and circumstances of the epistle. 1
(ii) 'Justification by works' or 'by faith' 6
(iii) Justification, sanctification, and Church
membership . 25
(iv) St. Paul's doctrine and modern spiritual
needs . 4 1

THE EPISTLE TO THE RO
IANS.
CHAPTER
I. 1-7 SALUTATION 4 6
8- 1 7 INTRODUCTION . 53
DIVISION I Universality of sin and condemna-
tion . 63
18-3 2
I Judgement on the Gentile world 66
II. 9 2 Judgement on the Jews 87
III. 1-8
3 Jewish objections 114
9- 20 94 Sin and condemnation universal 121
DIVISION II Justification by faith only.
21-3 1
I Christ our propitiation 13 0
IV.
2 The true seed of Abraham 155

viii

CHAPTER

v. I-I I

12-21

VI. 1-14
15. 2 3
VII. 1-6

7- 2 5

VIII. I-I I

12- 1 7
18-3 0
3 1 -39

Contents

PAGE

DIVISION III Thl accepted lift or tht moral con-
sequences of Justification.

I The holy confidence of the justified. 175
i 2 The second Adam . 185

3 The Christian life a living by dying. . 204
9 4 The perfect freedom in God's service . 226

5 Freedom from the law by union with
Christ . . 236

6 The function and failure of the law. . 245
9 7 Life in the Spirit . 271
i 8 The life of sonship . 288

9 The hope of the creation . . 298

10 Christian assurance . . 321

THE

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

-++--

I ntroductz"01Z.

1.

ST. PAUL'S great Epistle to the Romans \vas
written, as may be quite confidently asserted,
from Corinth, during the second visit to Greece
recorded in the Acts \ i. e. in the beginning of the
year commonly reckoned 58, but perhaps more
correctly 56 A.D.-the year following the writing
of the Epistles to the Corinthians. The reasons
for this confident statement, and indeed for all
that needs to be said about the circumstances
under which St. Paul wrote and the conditions
of Christianity at Rome, become apparent chiefly
in connexion \vith the later parts of the epistle
which are not included in this volume. They
1 Acts xx. 2 -3.

I.

B

2 The Epistle to the ROJJzalls

shall therefore be omitted here, and ,ve will
content ourselves for the moment \vith a very
brief statement of the results in ,vhich scholars
are now finding, as it would seem, final agree-
n1ent.
The existence of Christians at Rome ,vas due
not to any apostolic founding, for no apostle
appears yet to have visited Rome, but to the sort
of ' quiet and fortuitous filtration l' of Christians
from various parts of the empire to its great
centre which must naturally have taken place;
for from all quarters there ,vas a tendency
to Rome. 'Some from Palestine, some from
Corinth, some from Ephesus and other parts of
Proconsular Asia, possibly some from. Tarsus,
and more from the Syrian Antioch, there ,vas in
the first instance, as we may believe, nothing
concerted in their going; but ,vhen once. they
arrived in the metropolis, the freemasonry
common among Christians would soon make
them known to each other, and they ,vould
form, not exactly an organized Church '-that
n1ay well have been the result of the later
presence of St. Paul and St. Peter-' but such
a fortuitous assemblage of Christians as was

1 Hort's Prolegomena to Romans and Ephesians (Macmillan,
18 95), p. 9.

/lltroductz01l

3

only waiting for the advent of an apostle to
constitute one I.' Among this assemblage of
Christians it appears evident from St. Paul's
language 2 that there must have been J e\vs as
well as Gentiles; but the dominant character
of the church was Gentile 3. It is perhaps only
putting this in another way to say that there
would have been among the Roman Christians
elements of hostility to St. Paul and his teach-
ing, but Christianity as St. Paul taught it would
have been in the ascendant. And probably
S1. Paul's special informants about affairs there
would have been his special friends, Prisca and
Aquila 4.
The character of the epistle ,vritten to these
Christian5 of the capital is marked. It has
beyond any other of St. Paul's epistles the
character of an ordered theological treatise.
Of course it assumes the existence of accepted
Christian principles- the rudimentary instruc-
tion or Christian ' tradition '-in the minds of
those to whom it was addressed 5. But it takes
certain of these principles of the Christian
1 Sanday and Headlam's Commentary (T. & T. Clark, 18 95),
p. xxviii. This commentary is henceforth referred to as S. & H.
2 See Rom. iÏ. 17; iii. 9, &c.
S See Rom. i. 13 ; xi. 13-32; xv. 14-21. t Rom. xvi. 3.
5 See Rom. vi. 17, and remarks p. 234; cr. S. & H.: p. xIi.
B2

4 The Epistle to the ROl1tanS

religion and develops them systematically and
argumentatively; though again, it must be ex-
plained, the argument is very far from being
barely logical, but is full of the deepest feel-
ing, showing itself in passages of memorable
eloquence which live in the hearts of all of us.
Why this particular epistle should have this
character of a systematic treatise is not hard to
see. St. Paul was reaching the end of his great
controversy for the catholicity of the Gospel,
against the J udaizers-that is, for the equal
position of Gentiles and Jews in the Church,
and against the obligation upon the Gentiles of
circumcision and the ceremonial law. That
controversy was the occasion of the apostolic
conference at Jerusalem, which is described
both by 51. Luke in the Acts 1 and, from the
point of view of S1. Paul's own 'apology,' in
the Epistle to the Galatians 2. It is felt at its
whitest heat in that intensely concentrated and
passionate epistle. But by the time that the
Epistle to the Romans came to be \vritten the
controversy was quieting down. The victory of
catholicism over Judaism was as good as won.
The great .principle of justification by faith, not
by works of the law, had "developed itself lucidly
1 Acts xv. 1-35. 2 Gal. ii. 1-10.

Introductzon

5

and clearly in St. Paul's mind, and flowed out in
our epistle in an ordered sequence of thought,
rich, profound, and mature.
And there were special reasons why it should
have been expressed in writing at this moment,
and to the Roman Christians. Though the heat
of the conflict inside the Church was over, the
fierce hostility of many of the Jews, both within
and without the Church, to St. Paul personally
was by no means past. Now St. Paul was on
his way up to Jerusalem with the money collected
in the Gentile churches for the poor brethren
there. He attached great importance to this
expression of Gentile goodwill, and almost
more importance to its acceptance at his hands
by the Jerusalem Christians 1. It was to be
a link of mutual, practical love to bind the
divergent elements in the Church together. But
he felt, and as experience showed rightly, that
his enterprise would be attended with great
peril to his life. This epistle therefore, like his
speech at Miletus, has something of the character
of ' last words 2.' He is in writing it committing
to the future the fruits of his labours, so far as
they can be expressed in a doctrine, at a roomen t
when he feels that their continuance is being

1 Rom. xv. 25-3 2 .

:I Hort, 1. c., p. 44.

6 The Epzs/le /0 tlze R01J1allS

seriously imperilled. And this summary of his
life's teaching in its most characteristic aspect is
most fitly addressed to the Christians of the great
city which was the centre of the then \vorld.
St. Paul already conceived of Christianity as, in
prospect at least, the religion of the empire. It
\vas vastly important, therefore, that the capital
should know it and hold it in its full glory
and richness. He himself, if he escaped safe
through the visit to Jerusalem, was bent on im-
mediately going thither and securing this great
end by his personal ministry 1. But he could
not depend on the future. He must seize the
golden moment-buying up the opportunity at
least by a letter.
This, in very brief words, is an account of
the circumstances and conditions under \vhich
the Epistle to the Romans was written, and
it must suffice for the moment till some of
the details are presented to us in its later
chap terse

11.
There are men of whom it is especially true
that their teaching is the outcome of their own

1 Rom. i. 10 1 II; xv. 22-24.

/lltroductzøn

7

personal experience. If a man's teaching is to
have any real force this must be in a n1easure
true in any case. But in some men the personal
experience has set an exceptionally strong
impress upon the intellectual convictions, and
so upon the teaching. Such men-otherwise
very different from one another-are Augustine,
Dante, Luther, Bunyan, Newman. Such an
one was St. Paul. His intellectual theory is on
fire with the emotions bred of a personal ex-
perience, both bitter and sweet, but always
intense. And if there is professedly more of
.
autobiography in the Epistle to the Galatians,
yet in fact we know St. Paul's interior life, both
before and after his 'conversion,' so far as we
know it at all, mainly through the generalized
account of it in the Epistle to the Romans.
For the doctrine of justification by faith, not by
works of the la\v, developed in this epistle, is
the record of his personal experience reduced to
a general principle. St. Paul had, on the line

of his Pharisaic education, in the first half of
his life zealously sought to be justified by works,
and had found out his mistake.
What is the real meaning of this phrase?
Ordinarily we Englishmen find it natural to ap-
propriate 51. James' 'common sense' language

8 The Eþlstle to the R01nans

,.

about justification rather than St. Paul's \ and
say that faith is surely of no moral value without
works or good actions, and that we can be
justified by nothing else except our conduct.
Or if the Pharisees are pointed to with their
rigid ecclesiastical observances as types of n1en
seeking to be justified before God by the merits
of their works, then, in this sense of works, we
feel that the idea of justification by such means,
apart from deeper moral effort, is one which has
passed out of our horizon. Yet if we get to the
moral essence of the Pharisaic idea, we may still
.
find it lying very close at hand to us, even
though we do not know ,vhat a phylactery
means, and are at a safe distance from fasting
twice in the week, or giving tithes of all that
we acquire. A well-to-do Englishman, of what-
ever class, has a strong sense of respectability.
He has a code of duty and honour which he is
at pains to observe. A soldier, a gentleman,
a woman of fashion, a peasant's wife, a school-
boy, and an undergraduate, representing not
more than the average moral levels of their
different classes, will all of them make really
great sacrifices to fulfil the requirements of their
respective codes. Their conscience requires
1 On the relation between the two, see later, p. 168.

Introduction

9

this of them, and they would be miserable in
falling short of it. But their conscience is also
limited to it. They resent the claim of a pro-
gressive morality. Conscientious within the
region of the traditional and the expected, they
are often almost impenetrable to light from
beyond. They are nervously afraid of the very
idea of subjecting their life to a fundamental
revision in the light of Christ's claim, or to the
idea of surrender to the divine light wherever
it may lead. But this frame of lnind-con-
scientiousness \vithin a limited and well-estab-
lished area accepted by public opinion, coupled
with resentment at whatever completer and
diviner claim may interfere to disconcert one's
self-satisfaction, and bid one begin afresh on
a truer basis-is that very attempt to be justified
by works which appeared in the case of the
Pharisees, only dressed in very different guise
to that in which the conditions of modern
England clothe it.
For the Pharisees of the Gospels were the
later representatives of the Hasidaeans, i. e.
Chasidim or 'pious' folk, whom we hear of in
the Books of Maccabees 1. The later religious
development of Israel lay along the lines of

1 1 Mace. ii. 42; vii. 13 fr.

10 TIle Eþzstle to tile R0111a11S

rigid reverence for the law. In days then of
general laxity and a general prevalence of Greek
customs, these pious Israelites united themselves
to promote the devout observance of their la,v.
Their relation to Maccabaean heroes and rulers
varied, as religious or political motives were up-
permost in the Maccabaean house. They them-
selves pursued one consistent aim. They came
to be known as the Pharisees, the separated or
the separatists, the party who kept aloof from
everything common or unclean. As such they
represen ted the religious nation in its later
development. They had the bulk of the people,
and especially the women, with them. They had
consequently, as Josephus tells us, an irresistible
influence upon public affairs, and especially upon
religious affairs, and they held the social position
befitting the legitimate religious leaders of God's
own people.
This position, ,vith its accompanying reputation,
they doubtless deserved by their zeal for the
law, and for the I traditions of the fathers' which
hedged about or interpreted the law. But ac-
cording to the solemn witness of Christ and
St. Paul, a disastrous lowering of the best moral
standard of the Old Testament scriptures had
taken place among them. The Mosaic la,v was,

/ntroductzon

II

of course, a matter mainly of outward observance,
and therefore would become a matter of rigid
social requirement \vithin the area of such a
body as the Pharisees. Nowhere does public
opinion act more strongly than in a close
religious circle. But the social requirement

according to tradition came to be substituted I
for that deeper spiritual relation of the 'holy \
nation' and the individuals composing it to God \1
and His \vill, which is the real moral essence \
of the Old Testament. I How can ye believe,'
our Lord said to them, I which receive glory one
of another, and the glory that cometh from the
only God ye seek not 1 ?' This is the central
moral weakness of the Pharisaic position. A
social or ecclesiastical tradition had taken the
place of the v{iU of God. This social tradition
was rigid and stern in respect of the I tradition
of the elders,' but it did not revise itself con-
stantly or at all in the light of the mind of God,
and therefore its moral standard became debased.
It I made void the word of God because of the
tradition.' It 'tithed mint and anise and cummin,
and left undone the weightier matters of the lavv,
judgement, and mercy, and faith.' It I strained
?ut the gnat, and swallo\ved the camel 2.' It

1 Johnv'44.

, l\1att. xv. 6; xxiii. 23.

12 The Epzs/le to the R01nans

came to be almost purely external and consistent
with even the grossest spiritual hypocrisy, as
both S1. Paul and
ur Lord Himself assure us.
Above all, it was completely satisfied with itself.
, We have Abraham to our Father.' 'I thank
thee that I am not as other men are.' That is
the characteristic tone of Pharisees and of all
who, however unlike them otherwise, are living
by a strong social standard and priding them-
selves on belonging to a respectable and dignified
class. This it is that St. Paul calls seeking to
be justified or commended to God by' works' ·
or 'works of the law' -not, we must observe,
'good works,' such as are the fruit of a right
disposition towards God, of which St. Paul
never spoke with any disparagement.
I t is the characteristic of the Pharisaic attitude
that a man holds by a strict code enforced by
the public opinion of his church or circle; a
code which he diligently and even painfully
obeys. But it is characteristic of this attitude
also that it resents new light, and tacitly claims
independence even of God, provided that 'the
law' is kept or the accepted standard main-
tained. Thus the Pharisees resented the Christ,
when renewing the voice of the old prophets,
without respect of persons, He exposed the

I ntroductz'on

13

moral weaknesses of these religious leaders, and
bade them, in effect, begin again and think afresh
what God's will really meant: when He warned
them that the one unpardonable sin is to be self.
satisfied in one's own eyes, and to repudiate as
an impertinent intruder the fresh divine light.
The story is very familiar. They resented and
rejected the Christ because He made the un-
limited divine claim upon them: because He
spoke to them as God to the human soul, and
not as the representative of I the tradition.'
I Seeking to establish their own righteousness, 'I
they did not subject themselves to the righteous- II
ness of God 1.'
N ow we understand what it is to seek to be 1
justified by works. It is to have a social or \
ecclesiastical code, and to claim acceptance in ,
God's sight because we perform it, meanwhile
making I the law' under which we act, believed
to be divine, a substitute for the living and
personal God, and resenting any fresh and im-
mediate claim of God on the human soul.
In this mixture of subservience and indepen-
dence, of religious humility and human pride,
Saul of Tarsus had been brought up I at the
feet of Gamaliel in Jerusalem.' His was not

1 Rom. x. 3.

14 TIle Epistle to tlze R01J2anS

one of those slack consciences which enable
men to take the lowest line which respectable
public opinion will allow. In every ecclesiastical
system the strict law comes to be mitigated
by various dispensations and compensations-
generally substitutions of the easier ceremonial
for the harder moral requirement. But young
Saul no doubt took the law in its fullest sense
as the thing to be kept, with all its accompanying
traditions. So taken, it constituted no dOll bt
\vhat St. Peter calls it I-an intolerable yoke.
A strict Jew must have had a very difficult life
of it. But it was not this yoke of specific out-
ward requirements that staggered St. Paul.
What he found crushing was the inward claim-
I Thou shalt not covet 2.' He ,vho had deter-
mined to appear before God at the last with
a clear record as one who had kept the la,v,
found himself confronted by an inner and
searching claim of the divine righteousness, to
\vhich no blamelessness in out\vard conduct
enabled him to correspond. He could not help
feeling himself a sinner in the eye of God; and
the sacrificial system plainly gave his conscience
no relief at all. He does not even allude to it
in this conneXlon. Meanwhile, as he moved

1 Acts xv. 10.

:I Rom. vii. 7.

Iutroductlon

15

about in Jewish society of the empire at Tarsus
and else\vhere, he found that it required no
spiritual microscope to discover that the law in
many of its plainest moral injunctions was in
fact not being observed at all. He seemed to
see that instead of the law being really the
means of justification, it in effect put 'the
righteous nation' simply in the position of
condemned sinners, and himself among them, as
fully as if they were simply without a divinely
given law, like the' sinners of the Gentiles.'
We know well how, \vhen the \vay of God
had been learnt more perfectly, this earlier moral
experience of the effect of the law on himself
and others worked itself out in 51. Paul's mind
into a deep theory of the function, not of 'the
la\v' only, that is the Mosaic law, but of la\v
altogether--of1the letter' of any body of external
enactments. Law, he found, could enlighten
the conscience, but it could never reach deep
enough to the springs of will to strengthen and
purify them. God Inust become more intimate
to man than any external law can make Him.
A law of ordinances can only be a preparatory
discipline, intended by the very falsity of the
assumption on \vhich it is based to teach men
that they are not ,vhat they fancied themselves.

16 TIle Epistle to the R0111ans

They fancied themselves beings sufficiently in-
dependent to stand on their own basis and enter
into a covenant with God, to make a compact
with Him to observe a law and to abide by the
result. It is the function of such a compact as
bet\veen independent parties to convince men
that any such relation between God, the Creator
and Giver, and man, the creature and simply
the receiver-still more between God the Holy
and man the defiled and weakened-is simply
contrary to fundamental facts 1.
As yet, however, St. Paul was only rendered
miserable by his experience under the law. To
feel himself a sinner alienated from God was
a profound humiliation to his spiritual pride.
He was fired no doubt by the lofty ideal of
the righteous nation, standing before God in
virtue of its righteousness, of its performance of
the divine law, and therefore making its claim on
God to vindicate it before the whole world. He
threw himself zealously into rigid observance:
only, however, to find himself humiliated and
perplexed.
Meanwhile, he was becoming conscious of the

1 See the argument of Gal. iii. 15-22. 'God is one' in a sense
which excludes the idea of any relatively independent contracting
party over against Him.

Introduction

17

claim of Jesus of Nazareth to be the Christ.
Under what conditions that claim began to
confront him we do not in the least know. But
he must have known in the period before hi!5
conversion that the severest attack on the
spiritual position of the Pharisees ever delivered
had been delivered by Him who claimed to be
the Christ; that the Pharisees in cons(3quence
had thrown all their influence into the rejection
of His claim, and if they had not been the most
direct instruments of His death, yet had en-
couraged and sanctioned it. Thus the more
dissatisfied he became in his own conscience,
the more zealous he grew for the Pharisai

position, and the more fanati
al, therefore,
against the followers of the crucified Jesus.
At what point it began to dawn upon his con-
science that perhaps Jesus was right and not
the Pharisees; that perhaps it was In His
teaching. that his o\vn restless heart was to find
repose, we can only wonder. Some struggle
such as this dawning consciousness would in-
volve he certainly passed through. I It was
hard for him to kick against the goad 1.' At
last, and at a definite moment, God I triumphed
over him' in Christ, and he gave in his aIle-

1 Acts xxvi. 14..

I.

c

18 Tile Eþlstle to tIle R01nal1S

giance to Jesus as the Christ on the road to
Damascus. Many a l11an has thus after a struggle
surrendered to God at discretion: many a man
has shown the will, as Faber calls it,
'to lose my ,viII in His,
And by that loss be free.'
But to no man can it ever have involved a com-
pleter sacrifice of his o\vn pride and prejudice-
of his own personal comfort and safety-than it
did to 51. Paul: and, therefore, in no man did
it ever involve a vaster increase of spiritual
illumination. Hitherto he had stood on the
basis which his pride in his religious position
gave him and, starting thence, had sought to
erect the spiritual fabric of
life acceptable
to God. But the more he had known of God
and the more he had struggled, the less satisfied
he had become. God seemed to be in no other
attitude towards him than that of a dissatisfied
taskmaster. N ow he had surrendered at dis-
cretion into God's hands. He had no position
of his own to maintain. He had put himself in
God's hands. In His sight he was content to
be treated as a sinner, just like one of the
Gentiles-to be forgiven of His pure and un-
merited love, and of His pure and unmerited
love endued with a spiritual power for \vhich

In trodu ctzo 11,

19

he could take no credit to himself, for it was
simply a gift. Once more, he had henceforth
no prejudices and recognized no limitation on
what he might be required to bear or do. His
life was handed over to be controlled from above.
Thus when St. Paul sets justification by faith
and faith only in opposition to justification by
works of the la,v, he is contrasting two different
attitudes towards God and duty, which in the
two halves of his own sharply sundered life
he had himself conspicuously represented. The
contrast may be expressed perhaps in four
\vays.
I. The man under the law of works is mainly
concerned about external conduct and obser-
vances-the making clean of the outside of the
cup and the platter: the man of faith is con-
cerned almost altogether with the relation of
his heart to God at the springs of action. Faith
is a disposition of the heart which indeed results
in a certain kind of outward conduct, but which
has its value already, prior to the outward con-
duct, because of \vhat it inwardly is. Faith, as
Calvin said, pregnant \vith good works, justifies
before they are brought forth. This distinction
bet\veen faith and \vorks underlies St. Paul's
teaching in parts, but is never very prominent.
C2

20 The Epistle to the Romans

It accounts, ho\vever, for St. Paul's shrinking
from any insistence upon outward observances
in the Church, such as do not necessarily convey
any spiritual meaning or power. 'Why,' he
cries to the Colossians, I do ye subject your-
selves to ordinances; handle not, nor taste, nor
touch (all ,vhich things are to perish with the
using), after the precepts and doctrines of men?!'
2. Inasmuch as I the law' was a national
thing, so I \vorks of the law' were a supposed
means of justification confined to Israel, and an
occasion of contempt for other nations. Faith,
on the other hand, the mere capacity to feel our
own \vants and to take God at His word, is
a universal quality and belongs, or may belong,
to all men. Thus justification by faith is opposed
to justification by works of the la,v, as the uni-
versal or catholic to the merely Jewish or
national, and in this aspect the contrast occu-
pies a great place in 51. Paul's thought and
teaching.
3. But it is not in the things it is occupied
about, or in the range of its activity, that faith
is most centrally contrasted \vith \vorks. It is in
the attitude of man towards God which it repre-
sents. The I worker' for justification always

1 Col. ii. 20-

.

I ntroductl:on

21

retains his own independence towards God.
He works upon the basis of a definite covenant
by which God is bound as well as himself. He
has the right to resent additional claims. Faith,
on the other hand, means an entire abandon-
ment of independence. It is self-committal, self-
surrender. 'I know him whom I have believed,
and I am persuaded that he is able to guard
that which I have committed unto him against
that day 1.' The man of faith throws all the
responsibility for life on God, and says simply
and continually, 'Speak, Lord, for thy servant
heareth.' d.... f'
!
e\-..
u.01!I. v s.
It is of the utmost importance to notice that
this is the only attitude of man towards God
whiGh corresponds with the ultimate facts of
human nature, as science and philosophy are
bound to represent them. Man is, in fact, an
absolutely dependent being, physically and spiri-
tually. His virtue must lie, not in originative-
ness, but in correspondence. Supposing him
a free agent in God's universe, his freedom can
only consist in a power to correspond with
divine forces and laws intelligently and volun-
tarily; or on the other hand to disturb the
divine order of creation in a measure by wilful-

1 2 Tim. i. 12.

22 Tlze Epistle to the Romans

ness and sin. Now faith is simply the faculty
of loving corresponqence with God. ' J ustifica-
tion by faith' is. the only conception of justifica-
tion which is possible in the light of the root
facts of human nature. But of course the
practical appeal of this conclusion to the heart
and will is inlmensely increased, if men can
be shown to have acted as if they were in-
dependent and to have found it a failure; if
life lived in independence of God, \vith God as
it were withdrawn from the actual scene of life
to its far-off horizon, is found to have resulted
in havoc, weakness and despair. So, in fact,
S1. Paul's doctrine of the true means of justi-
fication is based on an appeal, not so much to
the ultimate constitution of our human nature as
to the experienced results of our independence
of God, to the facts of sin, whether among
Gentiles or Jews.
4. Finally, the principle of justification by
faith is contrasted with that of justification by
\vorks of the law in the view which it involves
of the character of God. The law, as S1. Paul
interprets it, views God as a lord and task-
master. Faith presents Him as the Father of
our spirits, always waiting upon us with His
eternal, unchangeable love; bearing \vith us;

Introduction

23

dealing \vith us even on a false basis which
by our sins we have forced upon Him, in order
to bring us to a recognition of the true; anyway
acting or withholding action, if by any means
we can be ,yon to recognize His true character
and our true life.
These are the broad contrasts between the
alternative methods of justification by faith or
by '\vorks of the la\v.' The law, and the attitude
towards God ,vhich the law suggested, are, in
St. Paul's view, the main characteristic of the
Old Testament. This is a point of view which
we should expect in one trained by the Pharisees.
We may possibly feel that St. Paul tends to
identify with the Old Testament as a whole
one particular element in it ,vhich specially
characterized one particular period. But at
least the element was there, and occupied there
a highly important place in the whole develop-
ment; and if St. Paul in his idealizing manner
sometimes speaks as if it was the whole of
the older covenant, as if he had forgotten all
the teaching of prophet and psalmist, yet he is
not really forgetful. Law is to him the charac-
teristic of the old covenant. But behind the
la\v God's dealings ,vith Abraham are for ever
in his imagination witnessing against the la\v's

24 TIle Eþzstle to tIle R011ZallS

limitation, and a similar \vitness is kept up all
along: so that St. Paul can take out of one of
.
the books of l\10ses his very central statement
of the principle of faith 1.
In what has just been said justifying faith has
been treated as if it were simply, as it is really,
faith in God; \vhereas in St. Paul's language the
object of ju&tifying faith is constantly' Jesus 2.'
The explanation of this is that in Jesus Christ
God has manifested His character as Father, and
has come near to men, 'reconciling the ,vorld
unto Himself,' by the atonement wrought
through His incarnate Son, and giving con-
spicuous evidence of His saving power by
raising Him from the dead 3. Thus, if Jesus
is the proximate object of justifying faith, it is
Jesus as manifesting the Father, Jesus as God
in
arnate; and St. Peter is strictly interpreting
St. Paul when he represents the object of
Christ's sacrifice and resurrection in the phrase,
'that your faith and hope might be in God 4.'
The faith of the Christian is the old faith of
Abraham and Habakkuk, the faith in the Lord

1 Rom. x. 5- 8 . 2 Cf. iii. 22, 26, &c.
3 2 Cor. v. 19; Rom. iv. 25.
4. I Pet. i. 21. It is of course the case that the name God
in the New Testament is generally reserved for the Father, though
the proper divinity of Son and Spirit is constantly implied.

11ltroductzon

25

Jehovah only no\v made manifest in a new
and completer manner, in a more intimate re-
lation to human life, and with a more winning
appeal to the human heart.

Ill.
N o\v that we have gained a general idea of
,vhat 51. Paul meant by justification by faith, as
opposed to justification by works of law, \ve
are in a position to deal with a number of
questions which have been famous in eccle-
siastical history. Does justification mean being
made righteous, or being reckoned for righteous?
if it means the latter, how can God reckon us as
being what in fact \ve are not? Again, what is
the relation of this justification to sanctification?
are these t\VO stages, of ,vhich the first is over
before the second can begin? Again, what is
the relation of justification to Church member-
ship? is justification a purely individual process
or fact, of which membership in the Church or,
,vhat comes to the same thing, reception of the
sacraments, is a merely secondary and strictly
unessential consequence?
The answers to these questions are all con-
nected with one another. Justification, to begin
,vith, is a judicial or, as it is called, 'foren.ic'

26 Tlze Eþlstle to tile R01Jzalls

word. I t expresses the verdict of acquittal.
The use of the word in the Bible made this
quite indisputable 1. Thus God justifies when-
ever He refuses to condemn-when, whatever
may have been our sins, He ignores them, and
therefore positively admits us into the accepted
people. And He declares His willingness to do
this simply because a man believes in Jesus
Christ. Let a man believe, or take God in
Jesus Christ at His gracious word, and the
value of this act of trust or allegiance is such
that God reckons it for righteousness, and admits
a man into the accepted people, as if he were
already fit for such fellowship in his actual
habits or character. There is 'imputation' here,
but it is the right sort of imputation. It is deal-
ing with us not as we are, nor exactly as we are
not, but as we are becoming in virtue of a ne\v
attachment under which our life has passed:
and this, as the engrossing modern conception
of development makes it easy for us to perceive,
is the only true and profound \vay of regarding
anything. Not the standard already reached,
but the movement, direction, or vitality is the
important matter. Faith, then, is 'reckoned for
righteousness' because it puts us upon the right
1 See below 1 p. 124.

/l1troductzon

27

basis and in the right relation to God; and there-
fore is a root out of \vhich, provided it continues
to subsist, all righteousness can healthily gro\v;
whereas the most brilliant efforts or 'works' on
a \vrong basis may have neither sound root nor
principle of progress in them. To believe in
Jesus is to have the root of the matter in oneself.
Therefore, when a man first believes, God can
ignore all his previous life, and deal with him
simply on the new basis, in hope. Of course
this preliminary acquittal or acceptance is pro- .
visional. As the servant 1 who had been for-
given his debts found them rolled back upon him
\vhen he behaved in a manner utterly incon-
sistent with the position of a forgiven man, so
our preliminary justification may be promptly
cancelled by our future conduct if we behave as
one \vho has 'forgotten the cleansing from his
old sins 2.' The prodigal son, after he has been
welcomed home, may go back again to the' far
country.' But it remains the fact :-of such
infinite value and fruitfulness is faith in God,
as He has shown Himself in Jesus, that when
a man first believes-aye, \vhenever, over and
over again, he returns to believe-he is in God's
sight on a ne\v basis, ho\vever dark be the back-

1 Matt. xviii. 23-35.

:2 Pet. i. 9.

28 Tlze Epistle to tlze ROl1zans

ground of his previous sins; and he can be
dealt with simply on the ne\v basis, according
to the movement of the Father's heart of love
,vhich his faith has set free.
N ow the justifying faith of the conscience-
stricken sinner, whose case St. Paul always has
in the foreground of his imagination, means first of
all and most obviously that he consciously takes
God at His \vord as being ready to forgive his
sins, and accept him for J eStis' sake in whom
he believes. It is belief in God as forgiving, or
in Jesus as-he does not stop to inquire how
-obtaining and giving him forgiveness. And
St. Paul laid great stress on this simple accept-
ance of the gift of pardon, as the gate of the
ne\v life and the first act of faith, because the
readiness to be treated as a sinner and merely
forgiven in spite of our sins is, as he kne\v
full \vell in his own case, the final overthro\v of
spiritual pride. But this simple' reliance on the
merits of Christ,' and acceptance of forgive-
ness at His hands and for His sake, is a pro-
found movement of the heart-of the spring of
human actions-which involves much more than
appears. Luther was hopelessly ,vrong and un-
like St. Paul when he isolated this mere reliance
on another's merits, and, setting it apart from all

Introductzon

29

deeper movement of \vill or love, \vould haye it,
and it only, concerned \vith our justification.
To St. Paul even the first movement of faith
is a surrender of independence, and a recogni-
tion in intellect, and much more in \vill, of the
lordship of Jesus. It is, in other words, a
change of allegiance, and this is the important
thing about it. And the absolved man, in
thanking God for his forgiveness, finds hims
lf,
as it were, inevitably and \vithout any fresh act,
embarked on a new service. If he does not
find this, he is not a man of faith at all. Faith
is so deep a principle that, though it shows
itself first as the mere acceptance of an un-
deserved boon from the divine bounty, it in-
volves such hanging upon God as necessarily
enlists the \viII to choose and serve Him, the
intellect to kno\v and \vorship Him ,vith a grow-
ing perception as He is revealed in Jesus, and
the affections to desire and love Him. The life
of justification thus proceeds I from faith to faith'
- from faith in Christ 'for us' to faith in Christ
'in us.' The justified man, accepted into the
'body of Christ' by baptism and made a partici-
pator of the life of Christ, receives the continual
gifts of the divine bounty in their appointed
channels, and his faith exercising its natural.

30 The Epistle to tlze R01nans

faculty of correspondence, absorbs and appro-
priates the divine gifts-intellectually, so that
..
the eyes of the understanding are opened in in-
creasing knowledge-practically, so that ( Christ
dwells in the heart by faith,' and it is no longer
the bare human self \vhich lives, but Christ
which lives in the renewed man, ,vith a con-
tinual display of moral po,ver.
The first justification or acceptance is there-
fore a preliminary step: it is acceptance for
admission into the divine household, or city of
God, or life in Christ. It is a means to an end,
and that end the fellowship of Christ, and con-
tinually developing assimilation to Him. Does
this mean, then, that justification and sanctifica-
tion are processes following the one on the
other, of \vhich the former is over before the
latter begins? Such a statement must be re-
pudiated so far as its latter clause is concerned.
You cannot thus logically sever a vital process.
They are two parts of one vital process; and the
man ,vho is not on tile way to being made like
Christ (ho\vever far off it he may be at the
moment) is by that very fact sho\vn to be not in
a state of justification or acceptance with God.
At any stage of spiritual life there must be
movement in order to Inake forgiveness pos-

112troducfz.on

3 1

sible. Grant this ho,vever and it becomes true
that justification, as meaning acquittal, is a pre-
liminary to sanctification, that is, the being made
like Christ. The having our I heart set at
liberty' is a preliminary to 'running the way
of God's commandments.' But even so ,ve
must recognize that 5t. Paul never exactly uses
this language. When he describes the stages
of God's dealings with the soul he passes from
justification to glorification, or (final) deliverance
from sin and ,vrath 1. Or, on one occasion, he
mentions sanctification before justification 2.
This is in part accounted for by the fact that
the word translated' sanctify' or I sanctification'
means rather 'consecrate' (as to priesthood) or
, consecration.' And though this consecration
involves I sanctity J (in our sense) because of the
character of God to whom ,ve are dedicated, yet
it may precede it; and we are in fact consecrated
and hallowed at the moment when we are ac-
cepted into the' priestly body J and anointed ,vith
the divine unction 3. This exact meaning of the
term sanctification in part accounts for 5t. Paul
not speaking of sanctification and justification as
successive stages of the spiritual life. When he

1 Rom. V.9- II . 2 1 Cor. vi. II.
S Cf. Hort, First Eþ. of Peter (Macmillan, 1898), p. 70.

32 The Epistle to the R0111al1s

is speaking about justification he is ans\vering
the question, What is the attitude of the human
.
soul to\vards God which sets God free, so to
speak, to accept it and \vork upon it? And the
ans\ver is, The attitude of faith. When he speaks
of sanctification, or rather consecration, he is
ans\vering the implied question, Ho,v is the in-
dividual to be thought of ,vhen he has been
admitted by baptism into the Christian com-
munity? And the answer is, He is to be
thought of as consecrated, or as sharing the life
of a consecrated people 1. St. Paul's language
in one place ,vould suggest that if ' justification'
qualifies for admission into the life in Christ, the
result of this admission is again a justification,
not no\v merely of our persons, but of our \vhole
moral being-a 'justification of life 2.' But this
is, at least, not his usual use of the word.
And no\v ,ve approach the question of the
relation of our individual justification to member-
ship in the Church and all that goes with that.
To put the question in a rough controversial
\vay-Is the Epistle to the Romans, as it has been

1 It is noticeable that St. Paul never uses the verb translated
'to be sanctified' of persons in the present tense. It always
describes an already existing state rather than a process.

Rom. v. 18, but cf. later, p. 202.

.
I ntroductzo1Z

33

frequently held to be, a thoroughly Protestant
work?
The Prophet Ezekiel first clearly discerned
and expressed the truth that the new covenant
of God \vith man must be based upon the con-
version of individual \vills and hearts. So it was
realized. The basis of the Church \vas a pro-
found movement of individual faith and love and
allegiance, in the apostles and first disciples.
And that on which it is based is that by which
it must progress-the real assent and correspon-
dence of individual \vills and hearts. They
that receive the testimony must set to their
seals that God is true. Thus one cannot pos-
sibly exaggerate the importance in Christianity
of the individual spiritual life, or of individual
conversion and faith, if he does not isolate it.
He cannot possibly exaggerate the stress laid'
in the Epistle to the Romans on individual faith
and its results, if he does not forget its context.
But \vhat is meant by this proviso? This simply.
St. Paul, in his doctrine of justification by faith,
is describing the basis of the new covenant of
God with man which is, as truly as the old,
a covenant \vith a community, an Israel of God.
The faith which justifies, therefore, means the
faith which qualifies for the community as truly
I. D

34 The Epistle to the Ronzans

as it admits into the favour of God. The very
evidence that God. accepts the first movement
of faith is that the believing man is admitted by
baptism into the body of Christ. The idea of a
faith in Jesus \vhich does not seek admission
into 'the body,' or disparages it even while
it accepts it, does not even present itself to
51. Paul's mind. A faith \vhich is content to
remain outside Christ is no faith at all, and the
act of being 'baptized into Christ' is an act by
which 'in one spirit we are baptized into one
body.' Again, the conception impressed upon
the institution of the Eucharist is that Christ's
atoning sacrifice is the basis of a ne\v covenant
with a society which is to share His life 1.
Elsewhere 51. Paul expresses this by saying
that what Christ bought for Himself was a
Church, a new Israel 2. What His sacrifice
purchased was a ne,v communzïy. There is the
less necessity to insist upon this truth because
it is now being very generally perceived. The
most powerful influence in recent German
Protestant theology is that of Albrecht Ritschl,
and through him the truth has come back,
through unexpected channels, that the object

1 Hart, 1. c., p. 24.
I Eph. v. 25; Tit. ii. 14; cr. Acts xx. 28.

I ntroductÙJIl

35

of the sacrificial death of Christ, and therefore
of the divine justification, is not the individual
but the Church I ; or, if \ve may venture to modify
the phrase, the object of divine justification is
the individual only as becoming and remaining
(so far as His ,vill is concerned) a member
of the Church. In fact, t justification' may be
rendered, without any false idea being attached
to it, I acceptance for membership in the sacred
people, the Israel of God.' And where anyone
has become a member of the Church without
even the rudimentary faith \vhich can render him
acceptable in God's sight, there the awakening
of such faith is the condition of profitable or
, saving' membership.
From this point of view it is not difficult to
see the relation of our epistle, broadly, to Pro-
testantism and Catholicism. Protestantism was a
reaction against one-sided ecclesiasticism. The
Church is the household of God, the home of
His people. She guides and disciplines their
souls. She feeds them with the bread of life.
But her representatives may suffer her to lose
the spiritual characteristics of the new covenant

1 Ritschl, Rechiferligung ulld Versöhnulzg, ii. p. 217 if. Cf. S. &
H., p. 122; and Orr, Rifsclzlian Theology (Hodder and Stoughton,
1898) p. 16g ff.

D2

3 6 The Epistle to the R0111al1s

and fall back upon those of the old. She may
come to be characterized by a mere authoritative-
ness. The spirit of' the la,v of ordinances' may
come to
prevail again. The sacraments may be
treated as charms; or, in other ,vords, all moral
and spiritual requirement may be summed up in
mere obedience, or in doing this and that. So,
in fact, it happened to a great extent in the
popular mediaeval system; and Protestantism
was a reaction. I t ,vas a reaction based on
truth, as Luther seemed to himself to re-discover
it in the epistles to the Romans and the Gala-
· tians. But the reaction broke up the communion
of Christians. It thus impaired the sense of the
one body, and very often resulted in obliterating
the perception of any obligation to the visible
body of Christ at all. It became individualist,
and disparaged the sacraments which are at once
both the outward means of union \vith Christ
and the bonds of cohesion for H is body, the
Church. But as ,ve no,v look back upon the
matter, we can see as clearly as it is possible
to see anything, that both mediaeval Catholi-
cism and Lutheran Protestantism (or modern
English Protestantism) represent one-sided de-
velopments in which thoughtful men cannot per-
manently acquiesce. The preliminary justifying

Introduction

37

faith of the individual does but ,varrant his
admission into the body of Christ, the divine
society, by baptism. And once admitted into
the body, and instructed in her tradition, faith
finds its function intellectually in meditating
upon and appropriating the full meaning of the
mystery of God, and spiritually in appropriating
and digesting the po,vers of that divine and
human life into ,vhich baptism admits us, and
in which the sacramental feast and sacrifice
continually makes us anew participators. The
Church ,vith its sacramental gifts, and the per-
sonal faith of the converted heart, are no more
to be set in antithesis than food and digestion,
or the 'virtue ,vhich ,vent out of Christ' and
the faith in Him ,vhich made men ,vhole. The
sacraments certainly do not save us ,vithout
conversion and faith, and faith which leaves us
voluntarily isolated from the visible communion
of the one body is not \vhat St. Paul meant by
'justifying faith.'
'Ah, yet consider it again!' is ,vhat we are
continually tempted to exclaim to some of our
modern controversialists ,vho appear to be still
repeating the ,vatch,vords of the sixteenth cen-
tury. For in fact the famous controversial
positions of the period of the Reformation were

LIBRARY ST. '^ARY'S COLLEGE

38 Tile Eþzstle to the R0111ans

intensely one-sided, and have been antiquated
by completer and maturer study-not least in
the matter of justification.
Thus Calvin's position on the subject was
based upon and permeated by a conception of
God as predestinating and creating and inter-
nally constraining some men to eternal life, and
equally predestinating and creating and aban-
doning other men, without possibility of re-
covery, to eternal misery. Such a conception
is utterly abhorrent to modern consciences: and
we shall have occasion to observe with how
little reason any conception of God predesti-
nating man to eternal misery has been attri-
buted to St. Paull.
Lutheragain, who identified himself,as noother
teacher has ever done, with St. Paul's epistles
of justification, was so zealous to separate the
faith in virtue of ,vhich God justifies us from all
idea of merit, that he represented it as a bare
acceptance of the divine offer without any moral
quality at all-a bare believing ourselves to be
saved, without any moral reason in it. Thus,
accepting an existing scholastic distinction be-
tween an 'informed' faith, i. e. a faith en souled

1 The subject comes forward especially in connexion with
chapters ix-xi.

Introductzo1Z

39

by love, and a (formless' or bare faith, he held
the faith on account of which God justifies us
to be rigidly of the formless kind; and while
fully recognizing the richer sort of faith as the
God-given quality of those already justified, de-
clared that it had nothing to do with their justifi-
cation. But this conception of two separate sorts
of faith, of which only the loveless sort, that
involves no moral ,vorth, has to do with our
acceptance with God, is not only a high road to
moral laxity or antinomianism, but is also utterly
alien to the spirit of S1. Paul, in whom the whole
life of faith is one and continuous 1. It could
only have arisen at a particular moment of
theological controversy which is past and gone.
And the same must be said of the allied doctrine
of the total depravity of our fallen nature, ,vhich
drove men to violent misinterpretations alike of
scripture and of their moral instincts.
And ,vhat of the Tridentine theology? No
doubt in its general view of our fallen human
nature it is far more reasonable and Pauline than
the Lutheran; and it is also truer to St. Paul in
laying the main stress on a divine righteousness

1 I know that any brief statement about Luther's doctrine may
be disputed, for his own statements vary considerably. But
I think the tendency of his teaching is fairly represented above.

.

40 The Epzstle to the R0111ans

actually imparted to us, and not on Christ's merits
imputed and not im'parted; or, in other words,
in recognizing that forgiveness is only a prelude
to the development of a new life of holiness.
But on the other hand it puts itself hopelessly
out of relation to St. Paul's language and
thought by interpreting justification as the
being 11Zade righteous, and accordingly speaking
of baptism as the instrument by which we are
justified, whereas to St. Paul justification means
our preliminary acceptance ,vithout regard to
what we have been, and the initial faith which
enables men to be thus accepted would normally,
in those he is thinking about, have preceded
baptism, as in his o,vn case, or that of Cornelius,
or of the eunuch. Who can doubt that the faith
of St. Paul's conversion is \vhat enabled God to
accept him, though it remained for him, as for
other men, to · \vash away his sins' by being
'baptized into Christ 1 ?'
May we not truly say that deeper and maturer
study of St. Paul has for us undercut and anti-
quated the theological standing-grounds of the

I 'Acceptance J is already acquittal j but only in view of the
new life of the body of Christ which is to emancipate man from
the power of sin. Thus it is only as incorporated into Christ
that he finds his former sin I put away.' I I believe in one baptism
for the remission of sins.'

I ntroductiolZ

4 1

sixteenth century, and substituted for them
something both truer, completer, and freer?

IV.
It only remains to make more emphatic \vhat
has been already suggested, that the Pauline
doctrine of justification is of much more than
antiquarian interest. We do not, as has been
already shown, get rid of the ( danger of thinking
to be saved by works' because we are not,
like the Pharisees, abandoned to ecclesiastical
observances. All moral codes or standards,
sanctioned by a society or class and involving
no more than a limited liability, come under the
moral category of (works of a law.' They all
are apt to leave men as independent of God as
the Pharisees, and as resentful of the fuller light.
The late Master of BaUiol expresses a charac-
teristic opinion that the notions of 'legal right-
eousness,' or of (the pride of human nature,' or
(the tendency to rebel against the ,viII of God,
or to attach an undue value to good \vorks 1,'
are' fictions as applied to our o\vn time 2.' But
1 He should say, if he would represent St. Paul, 'works,' not
, good works.'

Essay on 'Righteousness by Faith: in Epistles of St. Paul
(Murray, 1894), vol. iÏ. p. 264. The whole essay is very charac-
teristic and very interesting, but not very Pauline.

42 TIle Eþlstle to tlte ROl1zans

this is surely lamentably untrue. Men all round
us dread the idea of committing themselves
to God. They do not kno\v ho,v far it will
carry them. They are like \vould-be soldiers
who should refuse to enlist till they had had
some assurance as to the extremest risk that
their service might involve. Thus, because they
cannot get this assurance, they will make no
beginning of the life of real faith. They live by
a limited code \vhich retains their independence
for them. If they are also ecclesiastically minded,
the (legal righteousness' ahvays involved in this
sort of morality becomes even out,vardly more
like that of the Pharisees, and it is not very
uncommon among churchnlen. But the ,vhole
habit of mind, inside or outside the area of
professed churchmanship, has its root in \vhat
is properly and profoundly human pride and the
false clinging to independence of God. This
(pride of life' seems to be almost more dan-
gerous and, in fact, disastrous than even' the lust
of the flesh .and the lust of the eyes.' Thus
if \ve can only get St. Paul's doctrine of the
necessity of faith rightly understood, there is
no teaching more necessary for these times.
And, on the other hand, where men are really
ready to follow the light and do God's will, they

l1Ztroductzon

43

need-they need exceedingly for the good of
the ,vhole body-to realize St. Paul's teaching
about justification, that is, about God's constant
attitude towards men, in order to obtain that
peace which is meant to be, not the far-off goal
of Christian life, but its basis and foundation.
When a person is continuously apprehensive
and excited about his spiritual state, he is not
in the temper of mind in which he can best serve
God or ,vork out his own or other men's salvation.
'Peace must go before as well as follow after;
a peace, too, not to be found in the necessity of
law (as philosophy has sometimes held), but in
the sense of the love of God to His creatures.
He has no right to this peace, and yet he has it.'
In these words of the same writer whom we
just now \vere obliged to criticize we may find
a simple expression of the truth. ' Wherefore,
being accepted of God simply because we take
Him at His word, let us have and hold peace
v.,"ith God through our Lord Jesus Christ 1.' Then
we can throw ourselves without embarrassments
into the life of love and sacrifice, the life which
has the love of God in Christ for its motive, and
reflects it among men.
No doubt we must admit that 51. Paul's

1 Rom. v. I.

44 TIle Eþtstle to tIle Roma1zs

doctrine of justification has not been generally
appreciated in the Çhurch-the fact is strange,
but it is indisputable. No doubt also we must
admit that those who have chiefly been identified
\vith it have often even disastrously distorted it.
No doubt, as a result both of this neglect and
of this distortion, the ordinary religious English-
man of the present day is disposed to pass it by
as having little meaning for him. Nevertheless
it remains true that no revival of religion can
ever attain to any ripeness or richness unless
this central doctrine of St. Paul's gospel resumes
its central place with us also. For, as St. Paul
preached it, it means this above all else-personal
devotion to Jesus Christ as our redeemer. This
personal devotion begins by accepting from Hinl
the unmerited boon of forgiveness of our sins,
and (\vhat is only the other side of such forgive-
ness) inheritance in the consecrated body. But
the consciousness of ,vhat \ve have received
from Christ, and the price it cost Him to put
it at our disposal, gives to the \vhole subse-
quent life the character of a devotion based on
gratitude. This is the Christian life according
to 51. Paul-personal devotion to Christ and
personal service based on gratitude for what
He has done for us. I For the love of Christ

I ntrodztctz{J1

45

constraineth us; because we thus judge, that
one died for all, therefore all died; and He
died for all, that they which live should no
longer live unto themselves, but unto Him ,vho
for their sakes died and rose again.'

THE EPISTLE TO THE ROl\1ANS

It

CHAPTER I. 1-7.
Salutation.
IT was the custom in the days of the Romans
to begin a letter with a brief indication from
whom it came and to whom it was addressed, in
the form of a complimentary salutation, thus-
to take an example from the New Testament-
, Claudius Lysias unto the most excellent gover-
nor Felix, greeting 1.' We are familiar in our day
with the like forms for beginning and ending
letters, serving the same purpose and generally
no other. St. Paul then accepts the epistolary
form of his day, but pours into it an increasing
wealth of personal meaning 2. Thus in this
place the necessary address-' Paul the apostle

1 Acts xxiii. 26.

The salutation of the First Epistle to the Thessalonians, the
earliest epistle, is the most nearly formal. Those to the Romans
and to Titus are the fullest and richest.

Salutatzo1Z

47

to the believers in Jesus Christ \vhich are In
Rome, greeting '-is expanded into a saluta-
tion extraordinarily full of meaning, explaining
(1) who it is who \vrites the letter; (2) with \vhat
justification; (3) to whom; and (4) \vith \vhat
greeting.
(1) It is Paul who is writing, and he describes
himself both personally and officially. Person-
ally, since the day when he surrendered himself
on the road to Damascus, he has been' the slave
of Jesus Christ,' bound in all things to do His
will, and exulting all the tilne in the moral liberty
which that bondage gave him. Officially, he has
received a commission and an office equal to
that of the older apostles in the kingdom of
Christ: he has been 'called to be an apostle,
separated to proclaim the good tidings of
God.'
(2) It is then this glorious commission that
justifies his writing. These good tidings of God
are the fulfilment of an age-long promise for
,vhich the \vorld had been \vaiting. Of ancient
days there ,vere I prophets,' men commissioned
to speak for God, ,vhose \vritings remained after
them and are held in highest reverence as I holy
scriptures.' These men foretold good days from
God that were to come to His people in the

48 TIle Eþlstle to tIle R011lanS

coming of the divinely anointed king, the Christ.
And no\v they are come. God has sent to redeem
men not a servant, but His own Son. True, He
came as man among men: as one of the royal
house of David, the house frOlTI \vhich the
Christ ,vas promised; yet simply man in out-
ward nature and appearance, or 'according to
the flesh.' But besides that ordinary seeming
manhood, there ,vas in Him something higher-
a sacred spiritual nature. And this higher nature
it \vas that finally determined the estimate in
which He was to be held. If 'according to the
flesh' He \vas a man of David's house, according
to this 'spirit of holiness' He ,vas decisively
designated by God's own act as Son of God in
miraculous po\ver, and that especially when He
\vas made the example of a resurrection from
the dead. Thenceforth' Jesus' of Nazareth is
'Christ' and' the Lord' of Christians. It is He
through whom St. Paul and his fellows received
the outpouring of the divine bounty for their
o\vn lives, and their apostolic commission on
behalf of the name of Christ to bring all the
nations of the earth to the obedience of faith.
And this commission extends as far as the
Roman Christians and justifies St. Paul in
\vriting to them.

Saluta/zon

49

(3) To all the Christians at Rome, then, , called
to be saints,' i. e. called into the consecrated
body and to the consecrated life, St. Paul is
writing. He does not say' to the church which
is at Rome,' as in the other epistles of this date
he \vrites 'to the church at Corinth' and to
'the churches of Galatia.' And though this
might be accidental, yet probably it is due to
the fact that St. Paul thought of the Roman
Christians as individuals ,vho, many of them,
had been converted elsewhere and for various
reasons had come to be living at Rome; so
that in fact they had hardly yet attained the
consistency of a single ordered church.
(4) And to these Christians he gives his greet-
ing by \vishing for them those gifts which may
be taken as summing up the blessings of Christ
about ,vhich this epistle is to say so much-
'grace,' \vhich is God's love to us in actualopera-
tion, and 'peace,' which is the state of mind of
one \vho realizes God's love-from the Father
and the Son. This benediction is, ho\vever, but
a Christian form of that of Aaron, 'The Lord
make his face to shine upon thee, and be
gracious unto thee: the Lord lift up his
countenance upon thee, and give thee peace 1.'
1 N urn. vi. 25, 26; see Hort, Filst Ep. of Pdcr, p. 25.

I.

E

so The Eþzstle to the Ronzans

Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called /0 óe an apostle,
separated unto the gospel of God, which he promised
afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures, concerning
his Son, \vho \vas born of the seed of David according to
the flesh, who \vas declared to be the Son of God with
power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resur-
rection of the dead; even Jesus Christ our Lord, through
whom we received grace and apostleship, unto obedience
of faith among all the nations, for his name's sake: among
whom are ye also, called to be Jesus Christ's: to all that
are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace
to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord
Jesus Christ.
There is, I believe, nothing in the above
analysis ,vhich is not implied at least in the
original language of this salutation. And it
is a remarkable summary of the grounds of
St. Paul's Christian belie
more exact and ex-
plicit than the 'Remember Jesus Christ, risen
from the d
ad, of the seed of David, according
to my gospel 1.' There are some points in it
\vhich require further notice :--
I. The use of ' spirit of holiness' in connexion
,vith Christ (in ver. 4). Here it is put in anti-
thesis to 'the flesh,' i. e. Christ as He appeared
to the out\vard eye in His natural manhood;
and describes, vaguely and without further
definition, the higher nature of which, behind

1 2 Tim. ii. 8.

Salutatzon

51

His visible manhood, men became conscious 1.
Elsewhere 'spirit' is more exactly used to de-
scribe (1) the human spirit in us or in Christ 2;
(2) disembodied persons or angels or devils 3 ;
(3) the Holy Ghost 4; (4) the being of God 5 ;
(5) generally what has will and consciousness,
as opposed to the merely external, the' flesh' or
the 'letter 6.' Sometimes, as in 2 Cor. iii. 17, it
is hard to feel sure about the exact shade of
meanIng.
2. We have here, in a very brief compass,
St. Paul's conception of 'Christian evidences.'
He begins from Christ, 'according to the flesh.'
, And why,' asks Chrysostom, 'did he not begin
from the higher side? Because Matthew also,
Luke and Mark, begin from the lower. One
who would lead others upwards must begin
from below. And this was in fact the divine
method. First they saw Him (Christ) as man
on the earth, and then perceived Him to be
God.' I t was, in other words, through the

1 cr. I Tim. iii. 16, (justified in the spirit,' where the use is
approximately the same.
2 See I Thess. v. 23; I Cor. v. 5 ; James ii. 26; Matt. v. 3;
xxvi. 41; I Pet. iii. 18; Mark viii. 12.
3 Luke xxiv. 39 i Heb. xii. 23; i. 14; Matt. viii. 16, &c.
t Matt. iii. 16; Luke X. 21, R. V. &c.
15 John iv. 24.
II John vi. 63; Rom. ii. 29; 2 Cor. iii. 6.

E2

52 Tile EpIstle 10 the R01nallS

experience of His manhood that they arrived at
His Godhead. And the evidence of His divine
sonship ,vas in part miraculous; but it was not
mere miracle. I t ,vas miracle 'according to
a spirit of holiness.' It was miracle filled
\vith spiritual and moral meaning. I t was a
resurrection vindicating perfect righteousness.
3. The phrase 'the resurrection of the dead'
is translated more exactly by Wiclif 'agen-
risynge of dead 111cn.' Christ's resurrection is
the great example of what is to be general.
4. The obedience of faith exactly describes
the human faculty as it showed itself in St. Paul
himself at his conversion. With him to believe
was, without any possibility of question, to obey
Him whom he believed, and St. Paul knows no
faith which does not involve a like obedience;
cf. xv. 18; xvi. 26; I Pet. i. 2.

St. Paul
s zntroductzo1Z 53

CHAPTER I. 8-17.
St. Paul's 'itttroductz.on.
THE salutation is immediately followed by
a passage in which St. Paul introduces himself
specially to the Christians at Rome. He had
a delicate task to perform. The Roman Chris-
tians had been gathered probably from many
parts of the empire, because Rome was the
centre of all the world's movements, and ad-
herents of whatever ,vas going on in the empire
\vere sure by force of circumstances to find their
way to Rome. Thus, though no apostle had
yet preached at Rome, Christians had gathered
there. Many of them had not seen St. Paul's
face. But they had heard of him, no doubt, in
Jewish circles as a very dangerous man who
was upheaving and subverting established tradi-
tions and principles. He was a man to be looked
at askance. He must introduce himself there-
fore carefully. It was of the greatest importance

54 The Epzs/le to tIle Romans

to him, the Apostle of the Gentiles, that he should
gain full recognition among these Christians at
Rome, the centre òf the Gentile world. We ob.
serve then in this introduction what a gentle.
man, if I may say so, in the very deepest sense
of the term, St. Paul shows himself to be. He
speaks indeed with an admirable mixture of tact
and candour. We can hardly conceive any
better address in a delicate situation than this
address of St. Paul \vith which he makes his
approach to the Roman Christians.
He begins with what is pleasant for them
to hear, namely, that the report of their faith
throughout all the world is a good one. 'I thank
my God through Jesus Christ for you all that
your faith is proclaimed throughout the whole
world.' Then he goes on to add, as is usual in
his introductions, that he continually prays for
them. It was a remark of General Gordon's that
it makes a great difference in our feeling towards
a stranger if before we meet him we have prayed
for him. And we may with equal truth say that
it makes a great difference in the feelings of
others towards us if they have reason to believe
that we have prayed for them. St. Paul there.
fore gives himself this advantage. He says,
'God is my witness, \vhom I \vorship in my

St. Paul's z.l1troductz.on 55

spirit in the gospel of his Son, how unceasingly
I make mention of you al\vays in my prayers.'
Then he goes on to tell them that he not only
prays for their welfare, but prays that he may
have the advantage of seeing them face to face
and knowing them. And here he puts his desire
to see them on the true ground. He wants to
. visit them because he has something of the
utmost value to give them-that he may' impart
unto them some spiritual gift.'
Whatever may be the exact nature of the
'spiritual gift' St. Paul is thinking o
it is
clearly something for \vhich his bodily presence
is necessary. There is some divine power
which he as an apostle can communicate to
them only \vhen he comes among them. In
this sense he means that ',vhen he comes to them
he will come in the fulness of the blessing of
Christ 1.' He implies that the Roman Chris-
tians needed him and must wait for him to
supply their deficiencies. But \ve observe that
with beautiful tact he at once balances this
assertion of a divine po,ver entrusted to him for
their good, by representing his own need of
them. He does not speak de haut en has as if
he had everything to give and nothing to receive.

1 Rom. xv. 29.

S6 The Epzstle to the R0112ans

No: as the people depend on the apostle for
spiritual gifts, so he depends on the people for
.
spiritual encouragement. He must live by the
experience of their spiritual gro,vth. 'I desire,'
he says, ' to come to you that I may impart unto
you some spiritual gift, to the end that ye may
be established' (built up and made strong in the
faith). And then he interprets :-that is 'in
order that I with you may be encouraged 1 among
you, each of us by the other's faith, both yours
and mine.'
Then he goes on to tell them why he in
particular is bound to come to them, though
hitherto he had been hindered by circumstances.
It is because he is 'a debtor.' St. Paul was the
Apostle, not of the J e,vs, but of the Gentiles.
Therefore he is in debt to all the Gentiles till
he has given them the gospel, and more par-
ticularly to the centre of the Gentile world, to
Rome. And he would o\ve no man anything.
He "vould have no unsatisfied creditors. I-Ie
\vill pay his debt therefore to the Roman Chris-
tians. ' I am a debtor,' he says, 'both to Greeks
and to barbarians '-that is to all the Gentiles,
\vhether they were of Greek race or not. And

1 C To encourage' and C encouragement' are probably the best
'words to translate what in our Bible is rendered by C comfort.'

St. Paul's z1ztroduction 57

the Greeks were so identified with civilization
or education that this leads him on to say, ' I am
a debtor both to the educated and to the un-
educated.' This general debt includes Rome.
It was natural to include the d\vellers at Rome
under the head of Greeks, for it was through
the medium of Greek that St. Paul made his
appeal to them. And, in fact, the Christians at
Rome were, for the first two hundred and fifty
years or more of the Church's life, a Greek-
speaking people-a Greek colony in the Latin
city. Only towards the end of the third century
did the Roman Church become latinized in
language and spirit. St. Paul then is a debtor
to these Greek-speaking dwellers at Rome. 'So
as much as in me is I am ready to preach the
gospel to you also that are in Rome.'
But the name of Rome was, as he thought of
it, a name of awe. It brought in upon his mind
the tremendous undertaking that lay before him
and before the Christian Church as they found
themselves confronted \vith this vast imperial
organization, which might at any time lay its
iron hand upon them to stop their progress.
Therefore he adds that, even in vie\v of Rome,
he has courage in his heart: 'for I am not
ashamed of the gospel,' even under the shado,v

58 The EPistle to tlte R0112ans

of the mighty name, and though it was I to the
Jews a stumbling-block and to the Greeks foolish-
ness.' And why? Because he knows what the
gospel means. It is not mere words; it is a
power. It is a I power of God,' a divine force,
which, like the wind, bloweth where it listeth,
and which nothing can stop. It is a power of
God. It is a power of God I unto salvation,'
a power that is to work men's deliverance, and
that in the deepest sense. Roman emperors not
very long after 5t. Paul's time are commemo-
rated in public inscriptions as 'saviours of the
world 1.' That is in the sense of maintaining
peace and civil order. But Christ's salvation was
of a deeper sort. It \vas salvation from the bond-
age of sin, a salvation \vhich enabled people to
be truly and eternally free. It is a po\ver of
God unto salvation, and that 'to everyone
that believeth,' on the mere basis of the simple
willingness to take God at His word; 'to the
Jew first and also to the Greek.' , For' -and
here St. Paul reaches the great text of his whole
epistle-' therein' (that is, in the gospel) 'is dis-
closed,' or revealed here and no\v in the \vorld,

1 Hadrian and Trajan : see C. I. G. vol. ii. p. 1068, No. 2349 m. ;
vol. iii. p. 170, No. 4339, p. 191, No. 4380. These references
I owe to Mr. H. 'V. B. joseph, of New College.

St. Paul's 'introduction 59

I a righteousness of God.' By this phrase it will
appear that he means both a righteousness which
is God's own, and also a righteousness which
God gives to men; for the gift of God is real
moral and spiritual fellowship with His own
life. This is what is now offered to men. A
righteousness of God is revealed, starting from
faith and at every stage moving on upon the
support of faith, 'a righteousness of God by
faith unto faith'; and that not in repudiation of
the old covenant, but in fulfilment of its vital
principle: I as it is written.' F or the words of
Habakkuk may be interpreted to express the
central spirit of the Old Testament -' the
righteous shall live by faith 1.'
First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all
that your faith is proclaimed throughout the whole world.
For God is my witness, whom I serve in my spirit in the
gospel of his Son, how unceasingly I make mention of
you, always in my prayers making request, if by any
means now at length I may be prospered by the will of
God to come unto you. For I long to see you, that I may
impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be
established; that is, that I with you may be comforted in
you, each of us by the other's faith, both yours and mine.
And I would not have you ignorant, brethren, that often-
times I purposed to conle unto you (and was hindered
hitherto), that I might have some fruit in you also, even

1 Bab. ii. 4; cr. app. note A on meanings of the word' faith"

60 The Eþzstle to the R01nans

as in the rest of the Gentiles. I am debtor both to Greeks
and to Barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish.
So, as much as in me is,.I am ready to preach the gospel
to you also that are in Rome. F or I am not ashamed of
the gospel: for it is the power of God unto salvation to
every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the
Greek. For therein is revealed a righteousness of God
by faith unto faith: as it is written, But the righteous
shall live by faith.
I. Origen's comment on the words I through
Jesus Christ' (at the beginning of this section)
is very interesting. ' To give God thanks is to
offer a sacrifice of praise, and therefore he adds
"through Jesus Christ," as through the great
high priest.' Indeed, the doctrine of the high
priesthood of Christ, if it is not mentioned in
St. Paul's o\vn epistles, is implied there from
the first.
2. St. Paul, we notice, expresses his intention
to come to Rome with reserve, 'if by any means
by the will of God' . . . 'so much as lies in me.'
And this reserve was no matter of mere words.
He ,vas going up to Jerusalem with an offering
of money, about which he felt the greatest
anxiety, and he knew not how he would be
received, or what would befall him 1.
3. It is not possible to decide what sort of

1 Rom. xv. 25 fT.; Acts xx. 22.

St. Paul's Ûztroductzon 6r

'spiritual gift' St. Paul is thinking of. We
know that as an apostle he was qualified to
impart the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands,
and that certain 'gifts' frequently accompanied
His inward presence. Thus, (when Paul had I
laid his hands upon some men at Ephesus,
the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake
with tongues and prophesied.' \Ve know, further,
that the Corinthian Church, whence St. Paul
,vas writing this letter, was specially rich in
( spiritual gifts,' such as ' tongues and prophecy.'
On the other hand, the Roman Christians had
not yet received an apostolic visit and they may
have been lacking in such endowments, while
the reception of them would be calculated to
encourage them and strengthen their faith.
It is possible, therefore, that he refers to a
gift of this kind, and the exact language he uses
certainly suggests some definite endowment, for
the bestowal of ,vhich his bodily presence was
necessary. The thought of the miraculous
P?wer working through him, 'the power of
signs and wonders, the power of the Holy
Ghost 1,' was not far from his mind when he
wrote this epistle.
Origen's comment on this passage also is
1 Rom. xv. 19.

62 Tile Eþts/le to tIle Ronzalls

interesting. I First of all we ought to learn
that it is an apostolic work to long to see our
brethren, but for no other reason than that we
may confer on them something in the way of
a spiritual gift if \ve can, and if we cannot, that
we may receive in the same kind from them.
Otherwise, the longing to go about among the
brethren is not to be approved.'
We cannot doubt, I think, that when St. Paul's
letter was read at Rome this introduction, so
full of tact, would have given him access to
many hearts inclined at starting to be prejudiced
against him.

Unz'versall
Y 0/ sin and condemnatzon 63

DIVISION I. (CHAPTERS I. 18-111. 20.)

The unz'versaltïy of sz'n and condemnation.
ST. PAUL has enunciated his great thesis.
There has arrived into the world a new and
divine force making for man's fullest salvation:
the disclosure of a real fellowship in the moral
being of God, which is open to all men, Jew and
Gentile equally, on the simple terms of taking \
God at His word. This word of good tidings
51. Paul is to expand and justify in his epistle;
but first he must pause and explain its ante-
cedents. Why was such a disclosure needed
at this moment of the world's history? Why
has St. Paul spoken of 'salvation,' or why does
he elsewhere speak of 'redemption,' instead of
expressing such ideas as are most popular among
ourselves to-day-development or progress?
It is because, to St. Paul's mind, man as he is
is held in a bondage which he ought to find in.
tolerable, and the first step to freedom lies in the
recognition of this.. Again, why- does St. Paul

64 TIle Eþls/le to the R0l1za1zs

lay such emphasis on faith, mere faith, only
faith-,vhy is he to insist so zealously on the
exclusion of any merit or independent po\ver
on man's part? It is not only because faith,
the faculty of mere reception and correspon-
dence, represents the normal and rational rela-
tion of man to God, his Creator, Sustainer,
Father. It is also, and ,vith special emphasis,
because there has been a great revolt, a great
assertion of false independence on man's part;
and what is needed first of all is the submission
of the rebel, or much rather the return of the
prodigal son, simply to thro\v himself on the
mercy of his Father and acknowledge his utter
dependence upon Him for the forgiveness of his
disloyalty and his outrages, as well as for the
fello\vship which he seeks in the divine life. The
fuller statement therefore of St. Paul's gospel
must be postp?ned to the uncloaking of what
man is without it. The note of severity must
be struck before the message of joy. We must
be brought to acknowledge ourselves to be not
men only, but corrupt men-men under the
divine wrath-doomed men powerless to deliver
ourselves, and ready therefore to welcome in
simple gratitude the large offer of God's liberal
and almost unconditional love.

Unt.versalt
y of sÙz and condemnatton 6S

It is to produce this acknowledgement that
51. Paul now addresses himself. This argument
of the first part of the epistle is a very simple
one. It elucidates two plain propositions :-
I. that the wrath of God is, and is necessarily
according to eternal and unalterable principles
of moral government, and in the case of every
man without any possibility of exception, upon
SIn.
2. that all men, Jews and Gentiles, are held II
in sin, and therefore lie under the divine wrath.
Thus S1. Paul immediately follows up his
initial statement of the revelation of a divine
righteousness with the assertion of another
, revelation' made plain to the consciences of
men. 'The wrath of God is being revealed
from heaven against all ungodliness and un-
righteousness of men,' and he proceeds to
demonstrate the prevalence of sin first of all in
the heathen world and to lay bare its meaning.

}

i 5a1NO-t
dk.
7 wo-tkl. lI

øtCAll..cI. 'P

?
.sYa.4J k.

: ItM

bcn..øl4...t
sra:p
to tyud

to JlC

.
.so l"o...dJ. slê..pa
.
6,.41)
t.ì k

.
"Rt.bd
r
r .s
, ðw&1\.C JfN cl'f
f1t\cc.
,
MJi V

$

,..,ar

o
.
.s.
4M.l
t
"'
$

f.
.. .(n-rxp
,

,
1.".10 Ilt
1:;

t.

1fcn-

,,-
:.ti
",O'lQ..

66 Tlte Eþlstle to the Ronzans

DIVISION I.
1. (CHAPTER 1. 18-32).

Judgel1zent on tile Gentz'le world.

BEFORE we read this passage certain points
should be plain to our minds.
I. By sin S1. Paul means essentially wilful-
ness-wilful disobedience. There is such a
thing as an inheritance of moral weakness or
perversity which passes to men without their
fault and without their knowledge. This, the real
existence of which hardly anyone can deny, is
what is called original sin; and later on we shall
find St. Paul speaking of it. But it is not what
is most properly called sin. God is absolutely
equitable. 'Sin is not reckoned' as sin in His
sight, apart from knowledge and will. Sin,
most properly speaking, begins and ends where
wilful disobedience begins and ends. St. Paul
on this matter is completely at one with 51. John

Judgement on the Gelltz1e world 67

when he makes sin and la\vlessness identical as
realities in the world. 'Sin is lawlessness 1.'
And we cannot even make a beginning of
advance along St. Paul's line of thought till we
recognize the real existence of sin as something
different in kind from ignorance or weakness
or lack of development, and as an incomparably
greater evil than those. Sin is the created will i
setting itself against the divine will. I t is, as
a state or an act, the refusal of God. And the r
recognition of the awful existence of this refusal \
of God is the main clue to understanding the
miseries of the present world.
2. Sin therefore, involving as it does wilful
disobedience, can only be spoken of as prevalent
over the heathen world because, not merely
one chosen race, but all men in general have
had the opportunity of the knowledge of God.
St. Paul indeed elsewhere modifies the general
assertion of the fact which he makes in this
place, by broadly recognizing that there are
states of human existence which are low in their
moral standard, but are rendered comparatively
guiltless by the absence of moral knowledge-
states of life where sin exists but is not reckoned

1 I Johu iii. 4. The Greek phrase implies exactly that all sin is
lawlessness, and all lawlessness is sin.

F2

68 The Epzstle to the Romans

as sin 1. For I sin,' he says, I is not reckoned J as
sin where there is no enlightening law and no
consequent condemnation of conscience. But in
this passage, looking at humanity in general, he
asserts, like the author of the Book of Wisdom
or the perhaps contemporary Jewish author of
the Apocalypse of Baruch 2, that all men have
had the opportunity of knowing God from His
works in nature, and that their present state is
the result of a wilful refusal of Him. They are
'without excuse.' The sources of the natural
knowledge of God are indeed twofold, for there
is the moral conscience, individual and social, of
\vhich St. Paul speaks later; but here it is
the evidence of nature alone of which St. Paul
speaks: the witness of the creatures to I the

1 Rom. v. 13, 14.
2 Cf. Wisd. xiii. 1-9: 'For verily all men by nature were
but vain who had no perception of God, and from the good
things that are seen they gained not power to know him that is,
neither by giving heed to the works did they recognize the
artificer. . . . For from the greatness of the beauty even of
created things in like proportion does man form the image of
their first maker. . . . But again even they are not to be excused.
For if they had power to know so much . . . how is it that they
did not sooner find the Sovereign Lord of these his works?
Apoc. Bar. live 17, 18: ' From ti.me to time ye have rejected the
understanding of the Most High. For his works have not taught
you, nor has the skill of his creation which is at all times
persuaded you..

judgeJJleJlt on the Gentile world 69

invisible things' Of attributes of their creator,
that is to say, to His power and (generally) His
divinity.
3. Assuming then the opportunity of the
knowledge of God as lying behind human
records, St. Paul traces the history of sin. It
had its roots in the refusal of the human will
to recognize God and give Him the homage of
gratitude and service due to Him. Men' held
down the truth in unrighteousness,' that is,
restrained it from having free course in their
hearts and in the world because of the painful
moral obligations which it involves. Knowing
God, they refused to acknowledge Him with
thankfulness or 'give Him the glory.' Rather
they would themselves 'be as gods.' They
'refused to have God in their knowledge.'
Then from this root in the rebel will sin passed
to the obscuring of the understanding, as is
shown in the ridiculous aberrations of idolatry.
'They became vain in their reasonings, and
their senseless heart was darkened; professing
themselves to be wise,' the nations in their
worship showed themselves fools. Idolatry had
long ago appeared simply ridiculous to Isaiah:
he pointed the finger of scorn at the idolaters.
'They kno,v not,' he cried, 'neither do they

7 0 The Epistle to the Romans

consider: the Lord hath shut their eyes that
they cannot see, and their hearts that they
cannot understand. And none calleth to mind,
neither is there knowledge nor understanding
to say, I have burned part of the wood in the
fire; yea, also I have baked bread upon the
coals thereof; I have roasted flesh and eaten it:
and shall I make the residue thereof an abomina-
tion? shall I fall down to the stock of a tree?
He feedeth on ashes: a deceived heart hath
turned him aside, that he cannot deliver his soul,
nor say, Is there not a lie in my fight hand 1 ? J
Isaiah's language and thought had been elabo-
rated and developed in the Book of Wisdom 2,
and St. Paul appropriates it. To mistake crea-
tures for the Creator, or to think of the glorious
and spiritual God as if He were in the form of
the corruptible body of man or beast or bird or
reptile- so St. Paul alludes to the man worship
of Greece and the animal worship of Egypt-is
simple blindness and folly; blindness and folly
in ,vhich St. Paul sees the just punishment of

1 Isa. xliv. 18-20.
2 Wisd. xi. IS; xiii, xiv, xv. St. Paul's debt to the Book of
Wisdom is apparent (1) in the kinds of idols he mentions; (2) in
the way in which the thought of idolatry leads on to that of
uncleanness and sexual immorality; and (3) in the idea of retri-
bution by the natural law of results.

....

judgement on the Gentlte world 71

the rebellious will in the region of the intellect.
But it has another punishment in the region of
the appetites or passions. As men deliberately
C repudiated' the knowledge and obedience of
God, God C repudiated' men in penal retri-
bution. He gave them up to become vile in
their own eyes and to find out their impotence
to control their own lusts. They ran riot even
in all sorts of unnatural and lawless ways, so
that the world became full of sins of all kinds;
sins against God and sins against man; antisocial
sins of all sorts, the sins which destroy the state
and friendship and commerce and the home:
and at the last the very ideal of righteousness
had come to be lost. St. Paul, we notice, makes
the lowest moral stage of all to consist, not
in merely doing these wicked things, but in
abandoning all distaste for them -consenting
unrestrainedly to those who do them; a
d this
profoundly true remark explains the moral im-
potence of much that is from other points of
view excellent in Greek literature.
4. For the punishment of all this sin St. Paul
is not content to look to the' day of judgement,'
though that is to be the final and characteristic
expression of divine wrath, and that 'day of
wrath' he still probably anticipated in the more

72 Tile Epistle to the ROl11a1tS

immediate future; but he sees already in the
actual world of htij11an society as he knows it
the manifold evidence of the divine \vrath here
and now. Men are receiving in themselves the
fitting reward of their perversity. Their life has
found its own punishment. The divine wrath is
actually disclosed in the facts of experience.
I Look,' St. Paul seems to say, I at the way men
are living, and ask yourselves if there is any
interpretation but one of the facts you see.
There is but one conclusion possible. God has
condemned and is showing His wrath on the
human nature which He made.' Just in the
same way in an earlier epistle St. Paul speaks
of the Jews, even before the destruction of
Jerusalem, as already judged, already the sub-
ject of the divine wrath 1. And God's method
of judgement is this. The punishment lies in
the natural consequences of the lawless actions.
The wages of sin is also its fruit 2. And further,
this punishment of sin involves the increased
liability to sin again. One sin I gives us over'
to another, as one good action facilitates another.
This idea was familiar to Jewish teachers.
Among the I sayings of the Fathers' we find,
, Every fulfilment of duty is rewarded by another,

1 I Thess. ii. 16.

Butler's A1talogy, part i. chi :2.

]udgetuent on the Gentzle world 73

and every transgression is punished by another 1.'
St. Paul, in fact, in this chapter, may be said to
be concentrating for the Christian Church all that
is best and deepest in the moral philosophy of
Judaism.
N ow we are in a position to read the first
section of St. Paul's argument without perhaps
finding any single idea to the interpretation of
which ,ve have not a clue.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against
all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold
down the truth in unrighteousness; because that which
may be known of God is n1anifest in them; for God mani-
fested it unto them. For the invisible things of him since
the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived
through the things that are made, even his everlasting
power and divinity; that they may be \vithout excuse:
because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God,
neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings,
and their senseless heart was darkened. Professing them-
selves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the
glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an
image of corruptible man, and of birds, and fourfooted
beasts, and creeping things.
Wherefore God gave them up in the lusts of their
hearts unto uncleanness, that their bodies should be dis-
honoured among themselves: for that they exchanged
the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the
creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever.
Amen.

1 Pirgé A both, iv. :z (cited by S. and H.).

74 The Eþlstle to the R01Jzans

For this cause God gave them up unto vile passions:
for their women changed the natural use into that which
is against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the
natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward
another, men \vith men working unseemliness, and re-
ceiving in themselves that recompense of their errcr
which was due.
And even as they refused to have God in their know-
ledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, to do
those things \vhich are not fitting; being filled with all
unrighteousness, 'wickedness, covetousness, malicious-
ness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity;
whisperers, backbiters, hateful to God, insolent, haughty,
boastful, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
\vithout understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural
affection, unmerciful: \vho, knowing the ordinance of
God, that they \\7hich practise such things are worthy of
death, not only do the same, but also consent \vith them
that practise them.

I. Perhaps the first question which arises
in our minds when reading this passage is,
\vhether St. Paul's general account of the
heathen world is not unjustifiably severe. Does
he not paint it too black? In fact, the account
he gives coincides with the account given by
other Jews of the Gentile world as in their
experience they found it; and this, we must
remember, means the Gentile world of the great
cities of the empire. They thought, as they moved
about the world and sa\v \vhat they could not but

judge11'lent on the Gentzle world 75

see, that God had forsaken the Gentiles because
they refused to acknowledge His law. There
was sin enough in Israel, but it was remediable.
The sin of the Gentiles was irremediable. God
had forsaken them 1. This last idea is of course
one entirely alien to St. Paul's mind. To him all
God's judgements, at least in this world, have
one intention-to awaken men to recognize the
truth and to stir them to conversion, 'that he
may have mercy upon all.' But otherwise
St. Paul's view of the Gentile world, as he ex-
perienced it in the cities of mixed Greek and
Asiatic population of the Roman Empire, and
especially in the notoriously wicked Corinth
where he was writing 2, was the ordinary Jewish
vie\v. And a contemporary Stoic philosopher,
who wrote at Ephesus under the name of
Heracleitus, gives a picture of society in that
city fully as black 3.
At the same time, if we are to be fair, we
must recognize that the account, while true, is
not complete. The Gentile life was not without
its I salt.' There was a great deal of virtue,
both d
mestic and philosophical, in the empire
1 S. and H. p. 49.
2 He implies, as Dr. Farrar points out, I Cor. v. 9-10, that pure
society did not exist in Corinth.
3 See my Ephesians, pp. 91,92, 255.

76 Tile Epzstle to the R01Jzalls

--more perhaps in the country, of which St. Paul
knew little, than in the towns. And the exist-
ence of this salt he acknowledges when, in the
second chapter of this epistle, he speaks of
Gentiles \vhich have no revealed law but do by
nature the things of law, being a law unto them-
selves, and having the effect of the law written
in their hearts, and a witnessing conscience,
individual and social, to help them 1: and again,
when he intimates that there is an uncircum-
cision which puts the circumcision to shame by
keeping the la\v 2. But it is not St. Paul's way
to exactly correlate the different aspects of his
subject as a modern writer would do. He is
a prophet and preacher, not a formally systematic
writer. It is enough for him that the sin which
he is describing is a reality: that its tendencies
are what he describes them to be: that, what-
ever other counter tendency there may be, sin
is so dominant in the world that its results are
as he represents them, and that the conscience
and experience of those to whom he writes will
respond to his indictment.
N or, if we give its metaphorical meaning to
I idolatry,' is there a word which St. Paul says
in this chapter \vhich would not be true of our

1 Rom. ii. 13- 1 5.

2 Rom. ii. 26.

Judgement on the Gentzle world 77

modern civilization in London or Paris or New
York. With us indeed Christianity has been
sufficiently vigorous to provide a counteracting
force, of infinitely stronger power than existed
in the Roman world, to resist corruption. The
agencies of divine strength and recovery, the
centres of health and light, are infinitely more
numerous, stronger, more constant, more pro-
gressive. But the world of sin is still what it
was: and always there lies upon it the same
stamp of the divine condemnation. We look
around on the life of our city, with its selfish
and disgusting lusts, with its drunkenness, with
its enervating luxury, with its selfish wealth,
\vith its reckless and immoral gambling, with its
dishonest commerce, with its grasping avarice so
neglectful of the lives of those whom it makes
its instruments: we look round, I say, not
on the whole life, but on the sinful life of our
city, and we see what human nature is plainly
meant not to be, either in its characteristics or f
in its miserable issues. And by the interval
between what we see life to be and what we
know it was meant to be, we can measure the
reality of the divine judgement. The facts press
upon us the truth which 51. Paul would teach.
The sinful life is a condemned life. H ere is an

7 8 The Epistle to the ROl1zans

actual disclosure of the wrath of God upon all
unrighteousness and sin.
2. But what \vill 'science' say to St. Paul's
account of human degeneracy and degradation?
Does not 51. Paul seem to talk, as moralists in
general have been disposed to talk, as if the
course of the world's history had been a do\vn-
,vard course? and is not this the religious view?
and is it not directly opposed to the scientific
view of a gradual process of development and
advance? This is a very common form of
question to suggest itself to our minds. And
the ans\ver to it appears to be this 1 :- The
biblical vie\v of the world is not by any means
that as a whole it has gone from bad to worse.
It recognizes periods and areas of degradation,
and suggests periods and areas of stagnation.
And this is ,vhat anthropology and history
equally suggest. But its main concern is with
the history of one particular line of human
advancement under divine guidance through
Abraham and Moses and prophets and kings,
through Christ and His Church: an advance-
ment which is to be finally world-\vide, and
even more than world-wide, in its effects. Other
lines of progress in civilization and kno,vledge
1 See also app. note E 011 physical science and the falL

Judgement on the Gentz.le world 79

the Bible recognizes but is not largely concerned
with. But it is in its general effect thoroughly
in accord \vith science, which suggests not
general and equable advance over the whole
region of humanity, but advance in special
departments along the line of select races,
continually impeded in its progress by counter
tendencies, by periods and areas of degradation,
and still more of stagnation 1. Science, indeed,
utters no ,vord of promise at all as to the
ultimate result of all this evolution 2. It is faith,
of whatsoeyer sort, not science, that can make
us optimistic as to the issue of human history.
But no doubt the Bible does throughout pos-
tulate the existence of sin; and it claims that
sin everywhere, and from the first, has been
a cause of degradation in the individual and
the race. Now here is the real point at issue
in the relations of religion and science. The

1 Cf. F. B. Jevons, Introd. to the Hist. of Religion (Methuen),
pp. 394, 395: 'Everywhere it is the mauy who lapse: the few
who hold right on. The progressive peoples of the earth are in
a minority.' 'Though evolution is universal, progress is ex-
ceptiona1.'

Cf. Huxley, Evolution and Ethics (Romanes Lecture, 1893,
Macmillan), p. 36: 'The theory of evolution encourages no mil-
lennial anticipations. If, for mi11ions of years, our globe has taken
the upward road, yet, some time, the summit will be reached, and
the downward route will be commenced.'

80 The Eþzs/le to tIle R01JZal1S

main question is not about human origins or a
primaeval fall. It is simply on the comparatively
easy field of actual human existence. Is human
freedom-freedom within limits to choose and
act-a reality? Can man therefore misuse this
freedom to do what he need not have done and
ought not to have done? And has he, in fact,
constantly been doing morally wrong things,
wilfully and knowingly, which he need not have
done? Does, therefore, the area of human his-
tory present at every stage a result or product
which human wilfulness and lawlessness, that
is, sin, has contributed to spoil and to degrade
below its natural level? Now it is this-the
real existence of countless human actions vvhich
need not have been and ought not to have
been - which contemporary science, with a
necessitarian bias, is largely occupied in deny-
ing. Granted the reality within limits-limits
which have no doubt often been grossly ex-
aggerated, but granted the reality within due
limits-of human freedom, and therefore the
possibility and reality of actual sin and guilt
and degradation which need not have been,
I do not believe there remains any serious
conflict in the moral region between religion
and science. The conflict, I say, is continually

..
] udgeJnellt on the Gentz'le 'lfJorld 81

being taken back into the region of original
sin or the original fall. But this is a quite
secondary area of debate, in which I believe
there can be no serious disagreement, if there -
is agreement in the primary area of actual
human sin. The universal moral consciousness I ' I
and common sense of man bears \vitness to the
fact that we can do and do do ,vhat we ought
and need not. It recognizes, moreover, the moral
truth of St. Paul's idea that this la,vlessness of
the will has its perverting effects on the in-
telligence and on the passions. The human
conscience then responds to St. Paul's account
of the origin and history of human sin, and of
its fruits both in the individual and in society.
And if psychological science is inclined to deny
the very existence of any faculty of free choice
such as makes sin possible, it will be found on
examination to be going very far beyond what
it can prove. For the reality of guilt and sin,
and the degradation which results from it, ,ve
have the human consciousness; against it we
have no positive evidence: nothing in fact
but the habitual unwillingness of specialist
science, physical or theological, to recognize its
limits.
3. St. Paul finds the root of sin in the refusal

I,

G

82 Tile Eþlstle to tIle R01JlallS

of man in general to recognize God. He asserts
that they might have known Him, or rather did
kno,v Him, but declined to act on that kno",".
ledge. N O\V it is noticeable that he does not
ascribe this kno\vledge of God, \vhich he declares
to have been possible to man everywhere, to an
original revelation, nor even in this place to the
moral conscience, but to the evidence of nature.
In this, as in his ridicule of idolatry, he is in
accordance, not only ,vith Jewish thought, but
\vith contemporary Greek philosophy. The
argument from design had become habitual in
the schools, having been stated first of all with
transparent simplicity by Xenophon in his ac..
count of the reasoning of Socrates. St. Paul
then finds in this instinctive inference from
nature up to nature's God, 'a testimony of the
soul naturally Christian.' He is able, at Lystra
and Athens, to assume that men \vill respond
to it.
It is another question, into \vhich St. Paul
does not specifically enter, how far back in
human history the appreciation of this reasoning
goes. But it is \vorth noticing that among .our
contemporary investigators of the history of re-
ligion, some at least of the most acute have been
coming back to \vhat ,ve may call a modified

judgel12ent OIL the Gentz'le world 83

form of the doctrine of an original monotheism 1.
They think that even savage religions generally
bear traces, that are plainly independent, of a
belief in one great and mostly good God; and
that there is no evidence that this higher belief
was developed out of the lower belief in mani-
fold spirits of more ambiguous characters. They
see no reason to suppose that the higher belief
has been gradually arrived at within any period
into which the human mind can penetrate with
its investigations or its well-grounded conjec-
tures. Humanity appears to them to have-been
haunted from its origins with this belief in the
one God; and they regard all the higher re-
ligious movements as attempts not so much to
arrive at, as to retain hold on, a belief which
is continually in danger of being overlaid and
forgotten. It does not appear that anthropo-
logical science is at all likely to disprove such
a view which on the other hand has a great
deal of evidence to justify it. At least, the

1 The allusion is to (I) Jevons (op. cit. cap. xxv),. who seems to
think some 'amorphous' form of monotheism may very probably
lie behind totemism. He strongly repudiates the notion that the
lower form is necessarily the older. (2) Andrew Lang, lrfaking
of Religion (Longmans, 1898), chaps. ix and xv. Cpo also Orr's
Christian view of God and the World (Elliot, 1893), pp. 212 if.,
and notes E, F, G.

G2

84 TIle EpIstle to the R0l1za11s

evidences of deterioration in the history of
:-eligion are manifold and conspicuous. The
lo\vest view of God and man is not by any
means ahvays the oldest. And the recognition
of such facts is quite consonant with the doc-
trine of the evolution of religion in its more
reasonable forms.
Meanwhile, everyone is in sufficient harmony
\vith St. Paul's argument who recognizes the
universal facts of sin and guilt and needless
moral deterioration among men; and who recog-
nizes also that the secret of sin is the wilful
refusal on men's part to kno\v God as they
might have kno\vn Him, and obey Him as they
might have obeyed Him.
4. Besides these difficult questions, we should
mark what is both plain and instructive, that
St. Paul regards man as necessarily living either
above himself or below himself. Man's true
nature is to be in dependence upon God. Therein
is his true liberty and dignity of sonship. When
he tries to be independent, to be his o,vn master
simply, he loses the true principle of self-govern-
ment and becomes the victim of his o\vn passions.
God' gave men up,' handed them over as slaves
to dishonouring passions. This theory of human
nature is intimately bound up \vith all St. Paul's

] udgenzent on the Gentzle world 8S

teaching about grace and redemption, and \ve
shall hear more of it.
5. We shall do well to notice, finally, one
consequence which follows from recognizing
that the lowest stage of moral degradation lies,
not merely in doing what is \vrong, but in
having ceased to disapprove of it. That is to
say, the lowest moral stage carries with it a
complete loss of ideal, or absence of the standard
of right and wrong; and this lowest stage is
anticipated before it is reached. It follows,
therefore, and \ve must not forget it, that the
actual conscience of the individual, or of the
society, at any particular moment affords no
adequate standard of right and \vrong. The
moral conscience, like the intelligence in general,
requires enlightenment. It supplies no trust-
worthy information, except so far as \ve are at
pains to keep it enlightened. More than this,
its capacity to keep us admonished depends on
our habitually observing its injunctions. To
disobey conscience is to dull it, and finally to
make it obdurate and insensitive. The absence
of conscientious objection to a particular course
of action may therefore be due either to our
having neglected to enlighten our conscience or
to having refused to obey it. The duty of an

86 The Eplstle to tlze R01nans

individual to himself is not only to obey his
conscience, but also take pains to enlighten it.
And the duty of the individual to society is to
make continual efforts to keep the corporate con-
science up to standard.

""" . LJ\.U.

t

U. .
)- oJl

CÑ\M

L.,

t.e. ..

.U

)..

Mj(c.",

J ')
WW"'L-,

'1

...
"'"
. SMI\. t\...t

t

"'1
..r
,

'"

(A.

..

r \ k'

,
.
"'

cUA.

\ l .
WY'V \A C. L
h

h . J\...
t r...

1
\.

co )

,

1V-',
(
t \
f\

judge1-ne11t on the Jews 87

DIVISION 1.
2. CHAPTER ii. 1-29.

Judgement 01t the Jews.
ST. PAUL in his judgement of the Gentile world
is but repeating, with more of moral discern-
ment, what he would have learned in his Jewish
training. But the strict Jews who had taught
St. Paul, though some among them must have
been good men, ready to enter into the deeply
penitential spirit of their psalmists and pro-
phets, do not seem as a rule to have liked to
think of their own people as liable to divine
condemnation. They chose to suppose that the
Gentile world alone was the area upon which
divine vengeance would light, while the Jews
,vere to appear as the instrulnents of God's
judgements, or at least themselves exempt from
them. They had forgotten all the superabun-
dant warnings against such a spirit ,vhich the
prophets from Amos to John the Baptist had
let fall. This frame of mind-censorious when

88 Tlze Epistle to the R0l1'2a11S

it looks ,vithout, lenient to the point of blind-
ness when it looks \vithin
sometimes appears
,vhen one thinks of things in the abstract as
almost impossible, in the form at least in which
St. Paul here proceeds to attribute it to the
Jews. We can hardly believe that any re-
sponsible beings could be so blind as St. Paul
implies that his pious fello\v-countrymen ,vere.
But it needs only experience to convince us
that even in its grosser forms this frame of
mind is extraordinarily common in individuals, in
nations, and in churches. Certainly the nation
of England is not, and the representatives of
religious England too often are not, exempt from
the common failing. And in the case of the
J e,vs we have also the \vitness of our Lord. He
represents the religious Jewish world as honey-
combed with hypocrisy of a plain and gross sort.
They are to Him very types of the men who
behold the mote that is in their brother's eye,
but consider not the beam that is in their own
eyes. St. Paul's witness then is only the same
as the Christ's.
Here then St. Paul turns abruptly upon a
Jew \vho may be supposed to have been listen-
ing to the indictment of the Gentiles \vith
expressions of sympathy, and bids him look

Judgenzent 011 the Jews 89

within and recognize that the J e\v also falls
undeï the same indictment and on the same
grounds. And he proceeds sternly to cut a\vay
any possible ground of confidence \vhich he
might derive fïom the thought that he had
'Abraham to his fatheï.' God's judgement is
directed by an absolutely impartial 'truth' or
estimate of the facts in their inner reality. If
in any particulaï case of peïsistent sin His
judgement seems to lingeï, it is not that He
has forgotten or \vill overlook; it is only that
He is merciful and forbearing, and gives long
space for repentance 1. But, mean\vhile, if the
opportunity is not taken, if 'the heart is hard
and impenitent, a store is being laid up against
the offender in the place of judgement, which
will break out in the gïeat day in manifested
\vrath. God's principle of judgement is abso-
lutely free from partiality. There are men

1 Cf. Eccles. viii. I I : C Because sentence against an evil work
is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men
is emboldened to do evil.' Ps. x. I I : 'H e saith in his heart, God
hath forgotten.' Wisd. xi. 23: 'Thou overlookest the sins ot
men to the end they may repent.' Ecclus. v. 4 : 'Say 11ot, I sinned,
and what happened unto me? For the Lord is longsuffering.'
2 Pet. iii. 9: 'The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as

ome count slackness; but is longsuffering to youward. not wishing
that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. I
Cf. also Isa. Ivii. II. .

9 0 The Eplstle to the Ronzalls

who have steadily in view the true aim of
human life, its imperishable glory, its final and
peïmanent honour, and, therefoïe, preferïing
eternal to temporal things, patiently go on
doing good; they may be Jews or Greeks, but
in either case indiffeïently, the reward that they
have sought will be theirs with the accompani-
ment of inward peace. There are other men
who are contentious, and refusing the leading
of the truth, make themselves servants to un-
righteousness. They may be Jews or Gentiles,
but the divine wrath, showing itself in outward
suffering and inward anguish, will be upon them
all equally. For God judges men impartially
in the light of their opportunities. Those ,vho
have the advantage of a revealed la,v shall be
judged and acquitted according as they have, not
listened to it merely, but obeyed it. For a la,v
kno,vn and not kept, so far fronl commending
us to God, is but the instrument of our judge-
ment. And those ,vho have not this advantage
are yet not without an inward light in the
natural moral consciousness of mankind. Those
who have sinned against this light shall find
nothing else \vas needed to bring them to their
ruin. And those, on the other hand, ,vho by
its help keep the moral law in effect, without

Judgel1zent on the Jews 9 1

any assistance from a revealed law, are their
own law for themselves. They have the la,v
in its practical result written in their hearts
as their conduct shows, and their natural con-
science bears its accompanying witness. For
conscience, both individual and social, reflect-
ing on all human actions to condemn, or, more
rarely, to acquit, anticipates the final divine judge-
ment which, as St. Paul continually announces,
it will be the office of Jesus the Christ to pass
unerringly upon things secret as well as open
in the 'day of the Lord.'
The specially revealed law on which the Jew
relied, which it is his boast to have received
from God, and in virtue of ,vhich he could
rightly claim to have a knowledge of divine
things \vhich other men had not, and to be
the teacher of the nations, the interpreter to
other men of the divine will-this la,v finds
its first application to those themselves to whom
it is given. How can they preach the com-
mandments, whether it be the eighth or the
seventh or the second that is in question, so
long as they have so bad a reputation for
keeping them? They cannot deny that as of
old, so no\v, their moral conduct causes the
heathen to blaspheme their religion, instead of

92 The Eptstle to the Ronzans

being drawn to\vards it. To have received cir-
cumcision in physical fact is of no profit at all,
unless it be accompanied by the obedience of
\vhich the mark in the flesh is but the symbol.
Disobedience is in God's sight uncircumcision.
And where the obedience is, God will reckon
it as if the symbol were theïe also. The morally
obedient Gentile will sit in judgement on the
morally disobedient J eWe For that is the divine
principle. God everywhere and ahvays looks
to the spiritual reality as it is seated in heart
and \vill, and is satisfied never by outward dis-
tinctions. Jew a udah) means 'praise.' But if
the Jew is to merit his name, he must not
be satisfied \vith the applause of men. He
must commend himself to God ,vho sees the
heart.

Wherefore thou art without excuse, 0 man, \vhosoever
thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another,
thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest dost
practise the same things. And \ve know that the judge-
ment of God is according to truth against them that
practise such things. And reckonest thou this,O man,
\vho judgest them that practise such things, and doest the
same, that thou shalt escape the judgement of God? Or
despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance
and longsuffering, not kno\ving that the goodness of God
leadeth thee to repentance? but after thy hardness and
impenitent heart treasurest up for thyself \vrath in the

judgellzeut on tlze Jews 93

day of \vrath and revelation of the righteous judgement
of God; \vho \vill render to every man according to his
\vorks: to them that by patience in well-doing seek for
glory and honour and incorruption, eternal life : but unto
them that are factious, and obey not the truth, but obey
unrighteousness, shall be wrath and indignation, tribula-
tion and anguish, upon every soul of man that worketh
evil, of the J e\v first, and also of the Greek; but glory
and honour and peace to every man that \\Torketh good,
to the Jew first, and also to the Greek: for there is no
respect of persons with God. For as lnany as have
sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as
many as have sinned under law shall be judged by law;
for not the hearers of a law are just before God, but the
doers of a la\v shall be justified: for when Gentiles \vhich
have no la\v do by nature the things of the la\v, these,
having no la\v, are a la\v unto themselves; in that they
shew the \vork of the la\v \vritten in their hearts, their
conscience bearing witness therewith 1, and their thoughts
one with another accusing or else excusing tllem; in the
day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according
to my gospel, by Jesus Christ.
But if thou bearest the name of a J e\v, and restest upon
the law, and gloriest in God, and kno\vest his will, and
approvest the things that are excellent, being instructed
out of the la\v, and art confident that thou thyself art a
guide of the blind, a light of them that are in darkness,
a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having in the
la\v the form of knowledge and of the truth; thou there-
fore that teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou
that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?

1 Or rather C their own conscience bearing witness with them
and, in their mutual relations, their reflections accusing or even
excusing them.'

94 Tile Epistle to the R011tallS

thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost
thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou
rob temples? thou \vho gloriest in the law, through thy
transgression of the law dishonourest thou God? For
the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles
because of you, even as it is written. F or circumcision
indeed profiteth, if thou be a doer of the law: but if thou
be a transgressor of the law, thy circumcision is become
un circumcision. If therefore the uncircumcision keep
the ordinances of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be
reckoned for circumcision? and shall not the uncircum-
cision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee,
who with the letter and circumcision art a transgressor
of the law? For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly;
neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
but he is a Jew, \vhich is one inwardly; and circumcision
is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose
praise is not of men, but of God.

I. As at the end of the first chapter we asked
\vhether St. Paul was fair to the Gentile world,
so now we ask whether he is fair to those of
his own race whose religious tendencies he had
known so well from inside. And the ans\ver
again is that he undoubtedly represents aright
the dominant tendency and temper among them.
The prophets had always had to fight against
the natural but false idea of divine election,
,vhich held the Jewish race secure in the favour
of Jehovah, simply because He was their God
and they were His people. They bring to bear

judgelnent 011, the Jews 9S

all the activities of an inspired intelligence and
heart to make their fellow-countrymen perceive
that they are only secure in God's favour so
long as they are like Him in character. Now
do\vn to the period of the Captivity, the prophets
could also denounce the people because they
were constantly false to Jehovah in matters of
,vorship as ,vell as of morality. After the
Captivity, ho\vever, the tendency to idolatry
is gone for ever. After the M accabean period
the exclusive and legitimate worship of Jehovah
becomes a matter of passionate enthusiasm in
the Jewish race. Henceforth therefore their
danger from the false idea of election passes
into a new phase. We must be in the favour
of God, they now could plead, because we have
Abraham to our father, and because we keep
to the worship of our God with an irreproach-
able zeal for His law. Against this sort of
strengthened pleading John the Baptist, the last
of the prophets, aims his bare moral teaching.
God's wrath is just about to faU upon His peo- J
pie he declares, because it lacks in real moral
righteousness. Repent ye, be changed, get you
a ne\v heart-is his one \vord of preaching.
This keynote passes intensified into the teach-
ings and the denunciations of Christ. Nothing

9 6 The Epistle to the R01JlanS

more surely stamps the narrative of ' the woman
taken in adultery' as historically genuine \ than
its profound truth to the moral attitude of Christ
in face of Scribes and Pharisees. The point of
His reply to their trial question is that they who
\vould enforce a divine law, and thus stand for
God before the \vorld, must themselves be
morally sound. C He that is without sin among
you, let him first cast a stone at her.' It is
moral conformity, not merely orthodoxy, which
qualifies us to act for God. It is then precisely
this attitude of Christ towards the Jews zealous
for the la,v, ,vhich St. Paul is reproducing in
the passage which \ve have just read.
He suggests also in its last words-,vhere
he is playing on the meaning of the name of
Judah-another deep element in Christ's depre-
ciation of the religious spirit of the J e\vs. Their
religion \vas a matter of public opinion-with
all the stagnancy which belongs to the public
opinion of a compact society-not a matter which
lived \vith ever fresh life in the inner relation of
the conscience to God. ' H ow can ye believe
\vhich receive glory one of another, and the
glory which cometh from the only God ye seek
not? '

1 It is certainly misplaced as it stands (John vii. 53- viii . II).

judge111ent on tile Jews 97

St. Paul then is certainly right in his estimate
of Jewish religion. One indeed \vho describes
\vith as vivid reality as he does the pride of
a Jew in his religious privileges-one who had
all the reason that Saul of Tarsus had for
knowing ,vhat it ,vas to feel this emotion from
within-could hardly have been \vrong in his
estimate of its weaknesses.
And if the particular moral defects \vhich
S1. Paul attributes to the religious J e,v are
surprisingly grave-theft, adultery, and temple-
robbery-here too ,vhat he says out of his own
experience is confirmed from other quarters.
Avarice \vas a notorious sin of J e,vs. Our Lord
accuses the Scribes of 'devouring widows'
houses 1 , under cloak of religion, and denounces
the Pharisees also for leaving their out\vardly
purified cups and platters inwardly full of 'ex-
tortion.' It is only a subtler form of theft that
He alludes to ,vhen He denounces them for
sanctioning the practice of dedicating property
as a 'corban' to the purposes of religion in
order to evade the righteous claims of parents.
The story of Susanna, the brief but stern
\vords of our Lord about the seventh command-
ment in His Sermon on the Mount, and His

I.

1 Mark xii. 40 j Luke xx. 41; Matt. xxiii. 25.
H

98 The Eþzstle to tlte R0111allS

significant language on the occasion already
alluded to of he "
Olnan taken in adultery,
interpret S1. Paul's language as to sins of the
flesh. And the language of the town clerk at
Ephesus in exculpating St. Paul and his com-
pany, suggests that 'telnple-robbery' was a not
unfamiliar imputation upon J e,vs. It appears
that ,vith all their horror of idols-and though
everything connected with an idol was expressly
declared to be 'an abomination,' unless it had
been already desecrated by Gentiles I-they
could not always resist the opportunity of ap-
propriating the rich stores of the telnples. The
· religious' Scribes and Pharisees (though not of
course the best of them) ,vere, in fact, as a body
truly hypocrites, as our Lord sun1marily said
they were.
And there lies in the moral failure of the
Jews a very much needed \varning to us nine-
teenth-century Christians against censorious-
ness. ' Judging' occupies so large a part in our
ordinary conversation. I n the religious ,vorld,
we condemn so freely-Rolnanists, Dissenters,
those ,vho are of a different party to ourselves:
in the social world-those of a different class,
those ,vho employ us, or 'VhOlTI ,ve employ,
1 cr. S. and H. in loco

judge1nent on the Jews 99

those ,vhom in any way we do not like or who
go contrary to us. We are always judging.
But to judge, we are taught, is a great responsi-
bility. With what judgement we judge, we shall
be judged. It is of the utmost consequence
that before we judge others we should have
judged ourselves. And to have done that
truthfully has a tendency to make us charitable
in our estimate of others, because we are deeply
conscious of our own need of merciful and
lenient consideration.
2. What St. Paul teaches about the moral con-
sciousness, and possibility of moral goodness,
among the Gentiles has not a Jewish sound
at all. The Jewish teachers generally \vould
not have admitted any goodness acceptable to
God in the heathen \vorld. In fact, St. Paul
is here, as in his speech at Athens, accepting
the principle of a universal presence and opera-
tion of God in the human heart, outside the
limit of any special revelation, and he accepts
it in terms largely derived frorn current Stoic
philosophy.
The Stoics, arising when the Greek city life
,vas decaying, contemplated man as an indivi-
dual, and undertook to sho\v him ho\v to lead a
good life. A good life means a 'life according
H2

100 Tile Eplstle to tlte R01Jzans

to nature,' or 'according to reason': the reason
of the individual being a part of the universal
reason or God. And as a help in living accord-
ing to reason, the Stoics laid stress upon the
conscience in each man, i. e. a faculty lying
behind his ordinary surface self, passing judge-
ment according to reason upon his actions, and
I making co\vards of us all,' inasmuch as we all
do \vrong.
, Noone,' said Seneca, St. Paul's contem-
porary, '\vill be found \vho can acquit himself;
and any man calling himself innocent has regard
to the human witness, not to his o,vn conscience.'
He quotes an 'admirable saying of Epicurus,'
'The beginning of safety is the kno\vledge of
sin.' He inculcates the duty of strict self-
examination, and tells us how he performed
it himself at night: '\vhen the light is removed,
and my \vife, \vho is by this time aware of my
practice, is now silent, I pass the ".hole of
nlY day under examination.' Then he 'opens out
his conscience to the gods.' And this conscience
is to every man a sort of inward God 1. It is
in fact the representative in each man of the
universal, immutable, and divine moral law, the

1 See for Seneca, Lightfoot, Philippians, 'St. Paul and Seneca,'
pp. 27 8 - 280 .

]udgenzellt on the ] ews 101

la,v of nature, in conformity ,vith ,vhich is the
only true freedom and citizenship of the world.
, For this' (the world of the moral order), said 1
another contemporary of St. Paul, also a philo- ,
sopher, 'is the common home of all, and its la\v

is no \vritten document (letter), but God. And I
if a man transgresses \vhat the la\v imposes,
he \vill be Ünpious; or rather he ,vill not dare I
transgress, for he could not escape. Justice
has many furies, \vatch-dogs for sins 1.' There
is in Cicero's Republic a magnificent expression
of the principle of the law of nature: 'There
is a true la\v which is right reason, agreeable
to nature, diffused among all men, constant,
eternal, \vhich calls us to duty by its injunc-
tions, and by its prohibitions deters us from
\vrong; \vhich upon the good lays neither
injunction nor prohibition in vain; ,vhile for
the bad, neither its injunctions nor its prohibi-
tions avail at all. This la,v admits neither
of addition nor subtraction nor abrogation.
The vote of neither senate nor people can
discharge us from our obligation to it. We
are not to look for some other person to
expound or interpret it; nor ,vill there be one
law for Rome and another for Athens, nor
1 See Pseudù-Heraclcitus, Letter ix, p. 91 (Bernays).

102 TIle Epistle to the J?0112ans

one at this date and another later on; but
one la\v shall embrace all races over all time,
eternal and immortal; and there shall be hereby
one common master and commander of all-
God, \vho originated this la\v and proposed
it and arbitrates concerning it; and if anyone
obeys it not, he shall play false to himself
and shall do despite to the nature of man, and
by this very fact shall pay the greatest penalties,
even if he should escape all else that is reckoned
punishment.' I t is of interest to notice that
the words cited by St. Paul before the Areo-
pagus 1, ' We are also God's offspring,' occur
in a hymn of the Stoic Cleanthes, full of the
thought of man's relation through his reason
to the universal and divine law.
Of this type of thought and language then
St. Paul avails hilnsel
in spite of the immense
differences ,vhich disclose themselves belo\v the
surface bet\veen the Stoic and the Christian
ideas of God. lIe avails himself of Stoic phrase-
ology about men being God's offspring in his
speech at Athens, as being in accordance \vith
,vhat he, the Christian apostle, had to teach. And
here he adopts in substance the Stoic language
\vith regard to conscience. As by inference froln
1 Acts x vii. 28.

Judgement on the Jews 10 3

nature all men can kno\v of God's power and
divine attributes, so, St. Paul says, from the
witness of conscience they may know the
principles of His moral government 1. St. Paul,
however, rightly refuses to be satisfied with
the individual conscience. The social judge-
ment-the social verdicts of condemnation or
acquittal continually being passed-co-operate
with it to anticipate the judgements of God.
And in virtue of the in\vard light of reason,
and the conscience 2 both individual and social,
he held that men who lie outside the region
of special revelation can possess the moral la\v
in effect in their hearts, and, it is implied, can
keep it.
S1. Paul is mainly occupied in this epistle in
contrasting the Christian Church, as a region
where spiritual po\ver is given in response to
faith to enable a man to fulfil the divine la\v,
both \vith the heathen \vorld, plunged in moral
wickedness, and \vith the J e\vish Church in
its failure to attain to divine righteousness by
the law of works-of which more hereafter.

1 See Rom. i. 32 as well as Rom. ii. 14.
2 'Conscience,' as used by St. Paul's contempora\ ies and by
himself, is not a repository for positive moral guidance, but rather
a faculty for reflecting upon our own already accomplished
actions. See further, app. note B, on the idea of conscience.

104 Tlze Epistle to the ROl11,anS

But there \vere among the J e,vs true sons of
Abraham: and there were among the Gentiles
good men acceptable to God, like righteous Job.
St. Paul does not theorize about this. But
there is at least no reason to deny that he
would have declared these righteous men to
be justified by faith and sanctified by grace,
i. e. justified by that degree of truthful corre-
spondence with God ,vhich "vas possible for
them; and kept in harmony ,vith the \vill of
God by His Spirit. There is no reason to
believe that 51. Paul \vould not have admitted
some action of faith and grace among the non-
christian Gentiles, as he undoubtedly does
among the prae-christian Jews ,vho lived under
or before the la\v. When he says of the good
heathen that they do (by nature the things
contained in the la\v,' he uses the expression
not as equivalent to 'by theIr o\vn unassisted
powers, ,vithout the help of God,' but simply
to mean '\vithout the help of any special
revelation 1.'

1 See on this subject Life and Letters of Dr. Horl (Macmillan),
vol. ii. p. 337: 'Faith itself, not being an intellectual assent to
propositions, but an attitude of heart and mind, is present in
a more or less rudimentary state in every upward effort or
aspiration of man.' Also Gibson, Tllirl)'-l\,rine A,/ides \l\Iethuen),
ii. p. 420.

judge112ent on the Jews 105

Universally then, according to St. Paul, two
sources of the kno\vledge of God exist; nature,
with its evidences of the divine po\ver and other
similar attributes, and conscience, \vith its \vitness
to divine righteousness. And, though the sciences
of nature and man have grown since St. Paul's
day past recognition, nothing (we may boldly
say) has really weakened either element of this
double witness. It is, and remains true, that the
only reasonable argument from the universal
order of nature is to a universal reason or
mind: and that the method by \vhich the moral
conscience may be believed to have developed
out of (aninlal intelligence,' makes no differ-
ence as to the cogency of its ,vitness to a divine
righteousness, in response to ,vhich alone it
could have developed as in fact it has done. It
is ,vorth notice also before we leave this part
of our subject, that St. Paul's line of thought
affords a true explanation of the double fact that,
on the one hand, the actual 1110ral standards with
which the conscience of different individuals,
races, and generations is satisfied, greatly varies;
and, on the other hand, that all the standards
tend to\vards unity in a common idea of right-
eousness. The tendency to\vards unity St. Paul
\vould attribute to the divine righteousness

106 The Eþistle to the R0111ans

which lies behind conscience and ,vhich it exists
to reflect. The variations \vould be due to the
.
different degrees of development reached; or
still more to the different degrees of faithful-
ness or unfaithfulness, attention or inattention,
,vith which the conscience of the race or the
indi\?idual has responded to the light. The con-
science, like the speculative reason, is an instru-
ment for coming to the truth; but an instrument
capable of every variety of racial or individual
error or obtuseness.
3. It appears clearly enough in this chapter,
that St. Paul's doctrines of free grace and justifi-
cation by faith must be grossly and carelessly
misconceived unless they are viewed upon a
deep background of what we commonly call
, natural religion,' that is (practically) the religion
that appeals straight off to the conscience of
almost all honest and civilized men. It is
I natural religion' to believe that God will judge
men \vith absolute power and insight and im-
partiality according to their conduct and their
characters: that there can be no 'making
believe,' no substitute for a good character, and
no escaping ,vith a bad one. The prophets are
full of this principle. Our Lord reasserts it.
I t is emphasized by St. James, ,vhose plain

Judgen1ent on the Jews 107

point is that we are justified not by right belief
(\vhich is what he means by 'faith '), but by a
good life. But no one could assert the prin-
ciple more simply and absolutely as the basis
of all his special evangelical teaching than
St. Paul. And whatever is true about free grace
and justification by faith only, is true because,
and only because, this free grace and this justi-
fying faith are necessary means or steps
towards the realization of actual righteousness.
So St. Paul states it-' that the requirement of
the (divine) la\v might be fulfilled in us who
\valk 1 , according to the principles of the ' gospel
of the grace of God.' The doctrine of grace is
rooted and based upon the truths of natural
religion, and leads up to their realization. It has
been then a most perilous mistake \vhen mis-
sionaries have preached the doctrines of grace
and redemption in regions ,vhere there had
been no preparatory training in natural religion
-in the truth of the unity and power and moral
character of God: of the reality of our re-
sponsibility towards Him: of His inexorable
holiness: of His inaccessibility to any kind of
bribe or attempt to find some substitute for
moral obedience. l\1en must have kno\vn \vhat

1 Rom. viii. 4.

108 TIle EPistle to tlze ROl11,anS

it is to tremble in the recesses of their being
'as guilty men. surprised' before God's awful
righteousness; to (tremble,' like Felix, at the
message of 'righteousness, temperance, and
judgement to come,' before they can safely learn
the lesson of H is grace and pardon.
And there are t\VO minor elements in natural
religion, as commonly understood, for which
St. Paul here makes himself responsible. It
has been generally understood that all men in-
stinctively
esire their o,vn happiness, and that
this is natural and right; and that as we should
reasonably prefer our more permanent and
deeper good to \vhat is only transitory and
superficial, so \ve should strive for the happiness
and satisfaction \vhich is eternal-the eternal
re,vard, \vhich only the stern pursuit of virtue
can obtain for us. This deep desire for our
o\vn substantial happiness our Lord sanctions
and continually suggests as a principal motive
for right living. The love of others does not
annihilate it. (Thou shalt love thy neighbour
as tlz)Jself.' So then St. Paul also, following
his Master, recognizes it as lying at the heart
of \vhat is right and true in mankind, that \ve
should (seek' for ourselves' glory, honour, and
incorruption '-the glory and honour which abide

judgel'llent on the jezvs 109

eternally. It is plain that he would have us
pay no heed to that truly unnatural modern
altruism \vhich would disparage and depreciate
this motive of a right self-love, and which \vould
treat the desire for eternal happiness, and fear
of eternal loss, as a base and unworthy element
in religion. No doubt it is not the only motive.
It is not even the characteristically Christian
motive. But it is a natural and legitimate motive
all the same. It is an inextinguishable con-
sciousness in us that \ve were meant for blessed-
ness.
But, once more, the only true happiness is
n10ral happiness: it is a 'glory and honour'
spri ng i ng o ut of the man's character and belong-
ing to it: it is a happiness that is in this sense
deserved. True, the servant of God in heaven
\vill always feel that \vhat he is receiving is in-
finitely beyond his deserts, and that his deserts ,
are \vhat God has \vrought in him, not he him-
self: None the less the reward springs out of
and belongs to what God has actually made him
to be. Heaven is not a happy place in such
a sense that we could be made happy by being
(put there' by an arbitrary fiat of God. It is
fello\vship with God, the All-holy; and God's
holiness is intolerable, it is C devouring fire and

1JO The EPistle to the l?oJJzans

everlasting burnings,' to those who are not
morally like Him. Here lies the reason \vhy
.
a heaven is not possible to moral beings \vithout
the accompanying possibilities of a hell. For
the moral possibility of acquiring the holy char-
acter involves the opposite moral possibility:
and it does not lie in the moral nature of things
that the bad character should receive anything
except \vhat it deserves-the 'indignation and
\vrath' which God, because He is God, must
express to\vards the sinful, \vilful character,
and \vhich to the character itself means 'tribu-
lation and anguish.' This, St. Paul says posi-
tively, must be the lot of (every soul of man
. that doeth evil.' It is this inevitably two-sided
law that a large part of the kindly-disposed
,vorld to-day are trying to get rid of, or to forget,
on its severe and dark side. But it is in fact
a la,v that ,vorks even more necessarily and in-
exorably than physical laws, inasmuch as it is
the expression of God's necessary moral being.
God cannot I let us off' the punishment of our
sins, which is only their inevitable fruit. Nor
does He disclose to us any necessary limit to
the ruin which we may \vork in our being. This
stern principle of natural religion is taken up
into, and indeed intensified in, the gospel.

Judgement on the Jews III

51. Pau], however, neither here nor elsewhere
uses 'iInmortality' to describe the future state
of those whom God condemns. He uses it only
of God and of those who enjoy the vision of God.
The 'immortality of the soul '-the idea that
every soul as such necessarily and consciously
exists to all eternity-is an idea \vhich the
languagè of Scripture does not seem to warrant.
4. There are also t\VO less prominent points
in the second chapter that we must not entirely
pass over.
51. Paul, we should find, if \ve were to in-
vestigate the Inatter, is wholly true in his
interpretation of the Old Testament in general.
He interprets its spirit and meaning with perfect
insight. But he is not always what ,ve should
call critically exact, any more than the other
interpreters of his day, in his use of particular
texts. Thus, in this chapter he gives to some
words of Isaiah 1 a meaning which is indeed to be
found elsewhere in the prophets 2, but does not
really belong to the original of this particular
passage. Isaiah is saying that God's name is
being blasphemed hy the oþþressors of /srael-

I Isa. Iii. 5.
2 See in Ezek. xxxvi. 22: 'My holy name, which ye Ilave
profan
d among the nations, whither ye went.'

112 The EÞ.fst1e to tIle R01Jzans

'Continually all day long my name is blas-
phemed.' But the Greek version of the Bible
inserted the ,vords (through you' (the Jews 1) ;
and St. Paul interprets this insertion to mean
that it was the moral inconsistency of the chosen
people themselves \vhich caused God's name
to be blasphemed. Perhaps the fact that he
uses the forlTIula of quotation 'as it is written'
after the ,vords referred to, is a sign that he
had employed the ,vords in his o\vn sense before
he becalne conscious that they ,vere in fact
a quotation. But in any case he sho\vs no
anxiety to follo\v critically the original meaning
of a particular passage ,,"'hich he cites.
At the end of this passage occurs the anti-
thesis familiar in n10dern language of (the letter
and the spirit.' In its n10dern sense it is used
as equivalent to the literal and the meta-
phorical, or the definite and the vague. But
this is not at all its sense in St. Paul. With
him 'the letter' means the \vritten law, and
, spirit' lncans, in this connexion, \vhat we may
broadly describe as vital moral energy. Thus,

1 Dr. Gifford suggests that the LXX was subsequently modified
by St. Paul's citation (as in the next chapter, iii. 10-18), instead
of his citation being moulded by the LXX. Is there any evidence
in support of this view?

judge1Jlel1t 011 tlze feu's 113

in its most characteristic use with St. Paul, the
antithesis distinguishes the mere external in-
formation as to God's will, which ,vas all the
written la\v (' the letter ') could give the Jews,
from the activity of the Holy Spirit or the
spiritual power of moral freedom which, through
the gifts of the Holy Spirit, we enjoy under
the gospel. In this passage the antithesis is
similar, but not the same. It contrasts the
merely physical state of circumcision according
to the written law-' with the letter and cir-
cumcision' means 'having the written law and
being accordingly circumcised '-with what the
Old Testament had called 'the circumcised
heart,' i. e. the really obedient will or (spirit'
which may exist independently of the outward
rite. I Spirit,' we observe, may refer to the
activity of either the Holy Spirit of God, or
of the human will, or of both without discrimi-
nation.

II

I

11-} The Epistle to the ROl1zans

DIVISION I.
3. CHAPTER III. 1-8.

Jewish ohJectz'o12s.

THIS passage is interesting as showing us,
vJhat is more often the case than appears on
the surface, that 51. Paul has in mind as he
reasons the familiar objections of an opponent-
his o,vn objections, perhaps in part, before he
\vas a Christian. 51. Paul, that is to say, very
frequently \vrites controversially, and argues ad
lzol1zinem: and his own reasoning is only rightly
understood \vhen we have clearly in view ,vhat
he is opposing. It of course very frequently
happens in literature generally that a saying
is completely misunderstood, because that with
which it is contrasted is overlooked. Thus,
John the Baptist's advice to the soldiers to 'be
content \vith their ,vages' is commonly inter-
preted to mean-' Be satisfied with your wages

Jewish obJ"eclions

liS

as they are, and do not ask for more.' This
might have been good advice or bad advice to
give to the soldiers, but it is not John the
Baptist's. I-Ie means, (Be satisfied with your \
pay and do not supplement it by robbery and ,
unauthorized exaction.' Here then the implied
contrast is necessary to enable us to interpret
aright the positive advice" Similarly in the case
of S1. Paul, his doctrine of the absoluteness
of the divine election, as stated later in this
epistle 1, has been misunderstood, because it
has been supposed that he is asserting the
divine absoluteness as against the claim of
man to moral freedom, and to equitable judge-
ment in accordance with responsibility. But in
fact this is what he is indirectly vindicating.
What he is arguing against is the claim of the \.
Jews that God \vas bound to their race. It
is against this claim-this immoral claim to
perpetual privilege on the part of one race,
however they might behave-that St. Paul exalts
the absolute freedom of God to choose or reject
as He sees fit. It is of great importance then,
especially with a writer so frequently contro-
versial as 51. Paul, to watch continually to see
which is the phase of thought or feeling that
1 Chapters ix-xi.
12

116 Tlze Epistle to the R0111allS

he is opposing. Frequently, as I say, it hardly
appears on the surface of St. Paul's ,vriting that
he really has a definite opponent in view.
Sometimes, as in the passage now to be con-
sidered, it becomes apparent, and the argument
is best exhibited in the form of a dialogue
(though to let the dialogue appear clearly,
missing links have to be supplied) thus-
Jezv'lslz Objector. But if all this is true-if Jews
are no better off than Gentiles-of what use is
it to be a Jew? What is the value of our cir-
cumcision and the position into which it initiates
us? (ver. I.)
St. Paul. Its value is manifold. To take one
point first \ it lies in the fact that the oracles
of God-His teaching and promises-were en-
trusted to our race (ver. 2).
J. O. But if God thus of old gave special pro-
mises to us as His special people, and if now \ve
are simply like the heathen under His wrath,
the conclusion is that He has been false to His
promises (argument implied in ver. 3).
S. P. No: that is not to be thought of. It is
not God who has played false, it is man: it is
our race. The Jews refused to believe: not
ho\vever all .of them, but some. If there is

1 The points are resumed in ix. I.

Jewish objections

117

a trial between God and His people as to
which has been true, it is God who must be
vindicated as the Psalmist says 1 (vers. 3, 4).
J. O. But if, as your teaching proves, all our
unrighteousness is made to serve as a background
on which God makes His righteousness all the
more evident-that is enough. Our wrong-doing
serves its purpose in this ,vay. God has no
right both to use our wrong-doing for His o\vn
purposes, and then, besides this, to visit His
\vrath upon us (ver. Sa).
S. P. Such thoughts our human nature sug-
gests (ver. 5 h). But we know they are false.
God is the judge of the world, and His action
necessarily supplies the standard of all judicial
righteousness (ver. 6).
J. O. But do consider my point. If the result
of my playing false to God is that His fidelity is
only thro\vn into higher relief and the whole
process ministers to His glory, why am I, the
unconscious instrument of His glory, treated as
an offender? and why should I not resolve to go
on freely doing wrong (as you yourself are
sometimes accused of teaching), so as to give
God more abundant opportunities to overrule
my action for the greater good? (vers. 7, 8 It.)

1 Ps. xxxii.

LIBRARY ST. f
\ARY'S COLLEGE

118 The Eftstle to tile R01Jlans

S. P. A man stands justly condemned in the
very using of such an argument (ver. B b).

What advantage then hath the Jew? or \vhat is the
profit of circumcision? Much every way: first of all,
that they \vere intrusted with the oracles of God. For
what if some were without faith? shall their \vant of faith
make of none effect the faithfulness of God? God forbid:
yea, let God be found true, but every man a liar; as it is
written,
That thou mightest be justified in thy words,
And mightest prevail \vhen thou comest into judgement.
But if our unrighteousness commendeth the righteousness
of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who
visiteth \vith wrath? (I speak after the manner of men.)
God forbid: for then how shall God judge the \vorld?
But if the truth of God through my lie abounded unto his
glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? and why
not (as \ve be slanderously reported, and as some affirm
that we say), Let us do evil, that good may come? whose
condemnation is just.

What is of interest here is to notice that
St. Paul reproduces the argument of his Jewish
opponent with great sympathetic force. It had
clearly been \veighed in his own mind. It was
urged, no doubt, against his own teaching, that
it gave an excuse for sinning by suggesting that
the greatness of the sin only glorified the super-
abundant greatness of the pardoning love. It is
only too probable that some of his followers were
persuaded by some such argun1ent or acted as

jewlslz obJ"ectZ.Ol1S

119

if they were. Thus S1. Paul states it with vigour,
but thereby only makes all the more apparent
the meagreness of his reply. Not that the
argument is such as makes reply difficult. In
a slightly different form St. Paul deals with it
elaborately in chapters ix-xi. But here he
clearly treats it as contemptible when its true
character has once been disclosed. And why?
Because it is professedly an explanation of the
ways of God with man, which is at the same time
an excuse for immorality. It is an intellectual
exercise at the expense of conscience. And
St. Paul shows, by the very contempt with which
he treats it, that a man \vho will play false with
his conscience, and then proceed to find in-
tellectual justifications, is not to be met in the
intellectual region at all. He has been condemned
already.
St. Paul then, we find, \viU not argue with one
who reasons at the expense of his conscience; I
and this is an Ï1nportant principle. When the
intellect is acting purely, it must be free, and
must be dealt with seriously on its own ground.
But the conscience must be followed first of all.
Its light is clearer than the light of intellect, and
must be left supreme. Whatever be the be-
wilderment of my intellect, I am self-condemned,

120 TIle Eþzstle to tIle R01JlanS

God-condemned, if I play false to the moral light.
And arguments to the contrary, however clever-
sounding or philosophical, are in fact sophistry.
There is, ,ve must confess, a good deal of such
sophistry to-day in the use of arguments drawn
from the current philosophy of necessitarianism
and the idea of heredity.

Sz'n and condel1znatzon unlversal 121

DIVISION I.
4. CHAPTER III. 9- 20 .

Sin a1zd c01zdel1znalz"on universal.

AT this point the direct argument with an
opponent is dropped; and St. Paul restates what
he has so far been occupied in proving. It is
not that Jews are in a worse position than
Gentiles. It is that all together are involved in the
same moral failure. To deepen the impression
that this is a true statement, St. Paul culls from
various psalms and from Isaiah a series of
passages describing a general state of depravity,
moral blindness, apathy, failure, unprofitableness,
falsity, hatred, and outrage against God and man.
These utterances of the book of 'the law' (here
used for the Old Testament scriptures generally)
are meant for those first to whom this law
belonged. They condemn Jews as well as
Gentiles. They show all equally to be under

122 TIle EpIstle to the ROl1zalls

divine judgement. They prove that if the \vritten
Ia\v could teach Inen God's \vill, it could not, by
the ,vorks that it enjoined, enable him to satisfy
God. It had its function only in teaching him
to know his sinfulness by contrast to his plainly
declared duty. The conclusion is then that all
men, Jews and Gentiles alike, are involved in sin,
are under the \vrath of a holy God, and 'are in
utter need of a deliverance which they are in-
capable of procuring for themselves.

What then? are \ve in worse case than they? No, in
no wise: for we before laid to the charge both of Jews
and Greeks, that they are all under sin; as it is written,
There is none righteous, no, not one;
There is none that understandeth,
There is none that seeketh after God;
They have aU turned aside, they are together become
unprofitable;
There is none that doeth good, no, not so much as
one:
Their throat is an open sepulchre;
vVith their tongues they have used deceit:
The poison of asps is under their lips:
Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
Their feet are s\vift to shed blood;
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.
N o\V we know that what things soever the law saith, it
speaketh to them that are under the law; that every

Szit and conde11Znatioll unz.versal 123

mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be brought
under the judgement of God: because by the works of
the la\v shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for through
the law conteth the knowledge of sin.

I. The · Scripture proof' which St. Paul here
offers of universal human corruption is, according
to a recognized Hebrew practice, made up by
stringing together a number of separate texts,-
Ps. xiv. 1-3, v. 9, cxl. 3, x. 7, Isa. lix. 7, 8, Ps.
xxxvi. I. They represent the impression made by
hUlnan wickedness upon the righteous observer.
The estimate covers Israel as ,veIl as, indirectly,
the world at large 1. It is thus an authoritative
rebuke to Jewish self-complacency. It is as if
an English preacher were to rebuke similar self-
complacency in Englishmen by a collection of
passages from standard English authorities, in
\vhich our nation was judged, in common with
others, in a manner most humiliating to its pride.
It is this, though, inasmuch as the psalmists
and prophets were and are believed to have
spoken under the inspiration of the Spirit of
God, it is also something more.
It is well known that, as the quotations In

1 Dr. King (The Psalms in Three Collections, &c. : Cambridge,
1898) has remarked that Ps. xiv. 1-3 closely resembles the general
condemnation of · all flesh upon the earth' in Gen. vi. 5, 12.

124 The Eþlstle to tIle ROl1zans

the N e\v Testament have frequently affected
the Greek text of the Old, so here this con-
glon1erate of quotations came to be attached
altogether to Ps. xiv in some Greek MSS.,
increasing it by four verses. Thence they passed
into the later Latin \Tulgate. Thence into Cover-
dale's Bible and into the Great Bible, and so into
the Prayer Book version of the Psalms. But our
present Bible version remains true to the Hebrew
original.
2. 'To be justified,' in ver. 20, means to be
acquitted, or proved righteous, or reckoned
righteous in the trial before God. This, and
not to l1zake righteous, is the meaning of the
\vord · to justify,' both in the Old and Ne\v
Testament and elsewhere. There is scarcely
an exception. I t is a forensic word, that is,
a word derived from processes of la\v, and it
describes the favourable verdict after a trial. It
is used of vindicating God's character to His
people t, or of vindicating one's own character;
of God's judicial acceptance of men or men's
judicial acceptance of one another 2. And so far
as real righteousness is necessary for judicial

1 Cf. above ver. 4, from Ps. xxxii.
2 See Ps. Ii. 4; Job xxxii. 2; Provo xvii. 15; Isa. v. 23; Matt. xi.
19; Luke vii. 29; x.
9; xvi. 15.

SÙ
and condenl1zatio1Z universal 125

acquittal, the word implies real righteousness,
but it does not primarily mean it.
3. Here \ve find briefly stated St. Paul's
apparently \vholly original vie\v of 'the law,' as
given simply to enlighten the conscience by
keeping men informed as to their duty, without
supplying them with any moral assistance in
performing it. Thus the ultimate aim of the
law was to make man know his o,vn sinfulness;
to convince him that his attempted independence
was a failure, and that he could not save him-
self; and so to prepare him to cry out for the
gift of grace, and to welcome it when it was given.
'The law was given,' as St. Augustine is fond
of saying, 'that grace might be sought, and grace
was given that the law might be kept.' This
antithesis is thoroughly after St. Paul's mind.

II
II

This first division of our epistle gives us
as a whole a great deal to think about. There
are, we may say, two spiritual evils conspicuous
to-day. People with consciences in any degree
awakened are apt to be nervous, anxious, de-
spondent, complaining, sullen. The second
division of our epistle supplies the antidote to
this error by consolidating the awakened con-
science in divine peace. But there is another,

126 Tlze Epistle to the R01nans

and perhaps more conspicuous, spiritual evil of
our day ,vhich this first division is calculated to
meet-the habit of excusing oneself-the absence
of the sense of sin.

IIold thou the good: define it \vell :
For fear divine philosophy
Should push beyond her mark, and be
Procuress to the lords of hell.

Because philosophy and science have been bring-
ing into prominence the influence of heredity
and physical environment on character, we use
this consideration, and often with little enough
knowledge of real science, to obliterate the
,sense of sin. We are apt to regard sin as it
appears in the \vorld at large as a result of igno-
rance, or social conditions-as in one way or
another a form of mis fortu ne. And so viewing
it in the \vorld, ,ve vie\v it in ourselves. We
make excuses for ourselves. We have largely
lost the sense that sin is ,vilfulness; that it is an
inexcusable offence against God; that it does,
and necessarily does, bring us under God's in-
dignation; that necessarily, because God is \vhat
He is, the consequences of sin in this life, and
much more beyond this life, are inconceivably
terrible. It is this sense of sin that 51. Paul
must help to restore in us. We must believe

Sin and cOnden111atlon universal 127

that God is holy, and \ve must learn to tremble \
under His necessary holiness, before \ve can
in any right sense realize that He is loving.
We must learn once again to be really penitent;
to confess our sins in general and in particular
with utter humiliation; to expect the divine judge-
ment upon them; to use with reality the stern
language about sin of the Bible and the Prayer
Book. And learning this for ourselves with
regard to our own personal sins, we nlust learn
also to feel, like Daniel, what our church and
nation deserve in God's sight. We must
confess our own sins and the sins of church and
nation I-aye, of the human race. Only through
such a restoration of evangelical severity can
there be a restoration of evangelical joy. The
deepened sense of personal sin is the needful
step to spiritual progress. Certainly no more
in our case than in that of the Jews will ortho.
doxy, or ritual accuracy, or frequent services,
or superior education, or philanthro pic zeal be

epted a s a substitute for moral sever ity, for
the spirit of penitence and the readiness for
penance. Let us judge ourselves, brethren, that
we be not judged of the Lord.
And it is all-important what our standard of

I cr. Dan. ix. 4-
O.

128 TIle Eþlstle to lIte ROl1zal1s

judgement is. The Jews failed because they
judged themseh:es by a mainly external and
therefore easy standard. So do most respectable
Englishmen. We are satisfied if we do nothing
discreditable. But the religious sense of sin, as
it is experienced by the psalmists, or St. Paul, or
Luther, or John I(eble, arises from the intense
perception of a personal relation to the All-Holy.
The' falling short,' or rather' experienced need 1,'
of \vhich St. Paul goes on to speak, is the experi.
enced need of something very lofty, to \vhich
it is possible for men to be quite insensible-
'the glory of God.' God's divine brightness, the
eternal light, streams forth into nature. · The
whole earth is full of His glory.' Man also in
his natural and moral being is meant to have
fellowship with God. He is meant for the divine
glory also. I t is in proportion as he realizes
what he \vas meant for, and becomes conscious
in himself of a capacity for God, that his present
actual pollution and sinfulness becomes a reality
to his consciousness. It is in the light of God,

1 The word for I fall short' in ver.23 is a 'middle' verb, and
apparently implies not only failure in point of fact, but conscious
failure. Thus in Luke xv. 14, the prodigal son begins to feel his
destitution (middle). But in Matt. xix. 20, the rich young man
asks, 'What, as a matter of fact, is wanting to me' (active)?
See Gifford, or S. and H. Ù% loco

SÙz and condenuzatzon ttl1z'versal 129

and in aspiration after the glory of God, that the
sense of sin really awakens. I Thou requirest I
truth in the inward parts,' says the Psalmist. t
'Against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned.' 'If
thou, Lord, shouldst be extreme to mark \vhat
is done amiss, Lord, \vho may abide it? ' 1

1 Cf. app. note C, on recent reactions from the teaching about
hell.

I.

K

130 The Epzs/le to the R0111allS

DIVISION II. CHAPTERS III. 2I-IV. 25.
Justification by jatfh only.

I. (III. 21-31.)
Chrt.st our propttiation.
Now \ve have been brought to recognize the
true state of the case as between ourselves and
God-the facts about ourselves as ,ve are in
God's sight. We \vere meant for fello,vship
in the divine glory. 'The glory of God,' says
an old Father, 'is the living man: the life of
man is the vision of God.' But, meant for
feUowship in the divine glory, \ve have fallen
short of it and have come to appreciate our
failure. We have sinned, and that universally
and wilfully. We are such that God cannot
accept us as we are: the' day of His appearing'
could be for us but a ' day of wrath.' And in this
dire situation \ve are helpless. We can supply
no remedy. 'Can the Ethiopian change his

Clzrist our propz1zation 131

skin, or the leopard his spots? 1"hen may ye
also do good that are accustomed to do evil 1.'
But to acknowledge this-to abandon the claim

so dear to the human heart, that we can be I
(
independent and manage our own life success-
fully: to repudiate all our false pride, and to
come before God all of us on the same level,
confessing our failure and our sin-this is to let
man's necessity be God's opportunity, and to
open the flood-gates of the divine righteousness.
God is righteous in all the richest meaning
of that word, and that righteousness of His He
is no\v extending to us and giving us admittance
into it. And this He does purely and simply as
His gift. On His side it is pure and gratuitous
giving, on our side simple and unmeritorious
receiving. We contribute nothing. No distinc-
tions are admitted between those inside the la,v
and those outside it. The gift is quite apart from
the law, though law and prophets bore witness
to it. No questions are admitted as to what
we have done or what \ve have left undone.
Purely and simply out of the freedom of His
love, who is our Creator and our Father, now,
when a bitter experience has taught us again
our true attitude towards Him, He offers us
1 J ere xiii. 23.
K2

132 The Epistle to the ROl1zans

admission into His righteousness, all on the
same level, if we will simply believe in Jesus
Christ His Son, that is, take Him at His \vord
and believe His promises (vers. 21-24).
And what is this offer? It is, first of all,
what befits the captives of sin: it is redemp-
tion. God, \vho of old bought His people
out of captivity in Egypt, \vithout any co-
operation of theirs, by a pure act of His
power, has no\v again, \vithout any co-operation
of ours, but by a manifestation this time of
self-sacrificing love, in the person of Jesus
Christ, bought our freedom from sin. And
this redemption He offers to us first of all in
the form which befits sinners conscious of sin
and guilt, as the mere gift of forgiveness, the
mere po\ver to break with the past, the mere
right to stand and face the future with a
clean record. For as the brazen serpent was
lifted up before the eyes of rebellious Israel,
bitten of the fiery serpents, and those ,vho
looked unto it lived, so upon the open stage
of history God set forth Jesus Christ shedding
His life-blood-obedient, that is, to God and
righteousness unto death, even the death of the
cross. And this sacrificial shedding of the
life-blood of the Son of God-to which we

Clzrlst our þroþzïl.alzon 133

contributed nothing I-is accepted by the Father
as propitiatory, that is, as something which
enables Him to sho\v His true character of
righteousness, and to acquit or accept among the
righteous, irrespective of what he has done or
been, every one who has faith in Jesus (verso
24- 26 ).
And why (\ve in our age are disposed to ask)
did not God simply declare His forgiveness?
why this roundabout method of a propitiatory
sacrifice? It \vas (St. Paul's language suggests)
to prove or vindicate His righteousness, which
means both holiness and mercy. All the long
ages past of the times of ignorance, God had
been 'overlooking' or 'passing over' sins in
His forbearance, never 'suffering His whole
displeasure to arise,' but allowing all nations to
,valk in their own ,vays and to find out their
own mistakes and helplessness 2. The result
of their being thus left to themselves \vas that
men did indeed become conscious of their misery

1 Except the sins which slew Him.
2 I have combined this passage with the illustrative passages in
St. Paul's speeches to the heathen. Acts xiv. 16: (Who in the
generations gone by suffered all the nations to walk in their own
ways.' Acts xvii. 30: 'The times of ignorance God overlooked
(winked at); but now he commandeth men that they should
all everywhere repent.' Wisd. xl. 23: 'Thou overlookest
(winkest at) the sins of men to the end they may repent.'

134 Tlze Eptstle to the R01JZa1ZS

and need, but also came to entertain all sorts
of slack or un\vortþy ideas about God. A mere
declaration of forgiveness might have left men
with an impression of an easy-going or I good-
natured' God who \vould make light of sin.
But the awful burden laid upon Jesus on
account of human sin, the a,vful sacrifice of His
life which He readily offered, restores the
sterner element to our thoughts about God,
just at that crisis or opportunity in the divine
dealings, when by God's declaration of free
forgiveness we are made to feel His love.
God does forgive us, but it costs Him much.
And no one who under these conditions comes
and takes at the hand of Jesus the gift of
pardon can fail to receive with it the a,vful
impression of the divine holiness and of the
severity of the divine requirements. AU the
former 'passing over of the sins done afore-
time' \vas made morally possible because God
had in view that 'now at the present season,'
or opportunity, He would' show,' or prove, His
whole righteousness, and be before men's eyes
the righteous being that He is in fact (righteous
rather than merely I just '); and be able, without
the danger of a great misunderstanding, to give
His righteousness full scope by admitting into

Chrzst our þroPitiatz.on 135

it, by a pure act of pardon, everyone \vho comes
simply taking Jesus at His word 1.
H ere then there is no room for pride or
glorying. It is utterly excluded because there
is here no consideration of human merit. It
is a pure and unmerited boon of the divine
bounty bestowed, without reference to any
law known or observed, simply on those who,
utterly confessing their need, accept in faith the
offer of love. Again there is no reference
to any chosen race. J e,v and Gentile, circum-
cision and uncircumcision, are all in the same
case. All have the same need. God is the
same, with the same offer, for all alike. He
will accept the J eVI because he believes, and
He will accept the Gentile \vith no other equip-
ment but his faith. Yet this principle of faith
involves no repudiation of the principle of la\v;
rather, it realizes the very end which law was
intended to serve (vers. 27-31).

But now apart from the law a righteousness of God
hath been manifested, being \vitnessed by the law and
the prophets; even the righteousness of God through
faith in Jesus Christ unto all them that believe; for there

1 This paragraph gives distinctness to a somewhat latent thought
in verso 25, 26. But I feel convinced that this, and nothing else, is
the thought.

136 The EpIstle to tlze R0J11anS

is no distinction; for all have sinned, and fall short of the
glory of God; being justified freely by his grace through
the redelnption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God set
forth to be a propitiation, through faith, by his blood, to
shew his righteousness, because of the passing over of
the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God; for
the shewing, I say, of his righteousness at this present
season: that he might himself be just, and the justifier of
him that hath faith in Jesus. \Vhere then is the glorying?
It is excluded. By \vhat manner ofla\v? of works ? Nay:
but by a la\v of faith. \Ve reckon therefore that a man is
justified by faith apart from the \vorks of the law. Or
is God the God uf J e\vs only? is he not tIle God of Gentiles
also ? Yea, of Gentiles also: if so be that God is one, and
he shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the un-
circumcision through faith. Do we then make the law of
none effect through faith? God forbid: nay, we establish
the la\v.

I.
For our understanding of this famous passage
a good deal depends on our fixing, as exactly
as possible, what the 'righteousness of God'
here spoken of means. Beyond all question
it means in part God's own moral character.
This is quite certain, as in the Bible generally,
so in this very chapter 1. But it is also certain
that God's character is, especially in this epistle,
viewed as revealed to us in such a sense that we
can take hold of it and become identified with it.

1 Verses 5, 25, 26.

Christ our PrOPZ/latzon 137

Thus (especially in i. 17) human faith is spoken
of as the starting-point or region for revealing
divine righteousness. It extends to and em-
braces the believers 1. It is a righteousness
communicated to us from God on the basis
of faith 2. The' righteousness of God' is what
we men are to become 3. This transition of
meaning from what God is in Himself to what
we are by the gift of God is of course
thoroughly natural. The grand idea of the
Bible is that of a moral fello\vship bet\veen
man and God. The grand idea of the N e\v
Testament is, further, that of a disclosure and
communication to us of the divine life.
And \vhat is this n10ral quality described by
, righteousness' \vhich belongs to God and is
communicated to us? Righteousness is a term
belonging primarily to man. A righteous man,
in the Old Testament, is one who fulfils all that
is expected of him, one who is blameless-to-
\vards man, but especially towards God. But
if God expects such and such conduct in men
it is because of what He Himself is. His re-
quirements express His character. God Himself
.. therefore is believed to be righteous, incor-
ruptibly and awfully righteous. But a great

1 Rom. iii. 22.

2 Phil. iii. 9.

3 2 Cor. v. 21.

138 The_ Eþlstle to tIle ROJ1Zal1S

strain is put upon this belief in the 'wild and
irregular scene' of this world, the Governor of
..
which appears so often indifferent to the suffer-
ings of His most faithful servants. Thus the
righteous cry out to God to vindicate Himsel

and God's righteousness is, in the Old Testa-
ment, largely identified \vith God's vindication
of His o\vn character by righteous acts or
judgements accomplished in the past or ex-
pected in the future; acts of such a character
as that in them the wicked and insolent are put
to confusion, and the meek and holy justified
and exalted. Such righteous judgement is
expected to characterize the kingdom of the
Christ. Of course, in the general lowering of
moral ideals among the Pharisaic Jews, the idea
of righteousness suffered \vith all else. The
righteous came to mean those who strictly keep
the out\vard Jewish law; and God's righteous-
ness was identified with His expected vindication
of those who keep the la\v, i. e. the pious Jew, at
the coming of the Messiah 1. Our Lord, and His
disciples after Him, were engaged in nothing so
much as in deepening the idea of righteousness
again. Especially it is something much more
than the mere observance of out\vard ordinances.

1 Rom. ix. 31.

Christ our þroþl
latlo1Z 139

I t was, in fact, the fundamental error of the
Jews to confuse the two. Righteousness in
man must be real likeness to God, and God's
righteousness is His holy character \vhich He
is now once more manifesting in th
gospel of
His Son; a charactcr which is still shown in
acts of justice 1, in punishing the \vicked and
re\varding the righteous, but \vhich manifests
itself also more especially as love, and by gra-
cious promises of forgiveness and acceptance 2.
Thus, in Rom. i. 17, 18, the present' revelation
of divine righteousness' is a gracious mani-
festation \vhich is put in contrast to the C revela-
tion of divine wrath,' the place of which it is
intended to take. And yet, though the quality
of mercy is made emphatic, it is not isolated.
God's righteousness is not mere good nature.
It would not be rightly revealed by any mere
ignoring or passing over of sin. God's mercy
is inseparable from His holiness, and His right-
eousness includes both 3. It needed the severe
requirement of the atoning sacrifice, as well as

I Rom. ii. 5.
2 Cf. :r John i. 9 : ' Faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins.'
S Joseph, the' righteous' man in Matt. i. 19, is kindly. But his
kindliness has still the elements of moral severity. And it must
be remembered thnt in Rom. v. 7 'righteous' is still put in contrast
to I good.'

140 Tile Eþzstle to the R0111ans

the free gift of forgiveness and new life, to prove
or exhibit it.
.
And if God's righteousness shows itself first
of all in a simple act of justification of sinners-
in simply forgiving n1en or pronouncing them
righteous, irrespective of what they are in them-
selves at the moment, if only they \vill take God
at His word-three points have to be borne
in mind. First, that the mere offer of forgive-
ness is put in the forefront because this readi-
ness on our part to be treated as helpless sinners
is the annihilation of the one great obstacle to
our reconciliation \vith God-the proud inde-
pendence \vhich led the Jews, and has led men
since their day, to resent being dealt \vith by
mere mercy, and to \vant to justify themselves.
If the Christian character is to gro\v aright, it
must have its root in an utter ackno\vledgement
that we o\ve to God our power even to make
a beginning in His service: that we can run
the way of His commandments, because, and
only because, He by His own act has set our
hearts at liberty.

Just as I am, without one plea
But that Thy blood \vas shed for me,
And that Thou bidst lne come to Thee,
o Lamb of God, I come!

Cllrzst our proþlïlatlolZ 141

To many really good Christians this sort of
language has come to have an unreal sound
because they have been surfeited with it, and
because it has been associated with a very one-
sided Christianity. But, for all that, the moral
necessity remains that we should dig out of its
last refuges the claim of human independence,
if the Christian character is to gro,v healthily.
In other \vords, the only root of Christian
thankfulness and progress is the recognition
that our spiritual life rests at its basis on a pure
act of the divine bounty in accomplishing our
redemption from sin and giving us the forgive-
ness of all our sins.
Secondly, it must be borne in mind that our
forgiveness through the sacrifice is only the
first step towards fello\vship \vith God. It is
only the removal of the preliminary obstacle
\vhich guilt had raised against actual admittance
into the life of God. The language of the N e\v
Testament refuses to allo\v us to separate the
forgiveness of our sins from our admission into
the (body of Christ' by baptism \ or, in other
vvords, our incorporation into the life of the
redeemed people, the ne\v Israel. For the faith

1 See Acts ii. 38: 'Be baptized . . . unto tbe remission of your
sins.' xxii. 16: 'Be baptized and wasb away thy sins.'

142 TIle EpIstle to the R01na1tS

,vhich accepts forgiveness is the same identical
quality which corresponds ,vith all the later move-
ment of the new life. God's free gift of grace
is not forgiveness only, but forgiveness and new
life; it is 'forgiveness of sins and an inheritance
among them that are sanctified by faith that is
in Christ 1.' St. Paul does not contemplate, or
contemplates only to repudiate, a faith which
accepts forgiveness and stops there-indifferent
to actual holiness or baptismal incorporation.
For it would be no real faith at all. The pre-
liminary justification or acquittal is simply and
solely to serve as
basis for the life of conse-
cration and glory. The stages of justification and
sanctification are separable in idea but not in
fact. The refusal to proceed from the threshold
of the acquittal into the palace of the new life
would expel even from the threshold; even as
the failure of the unthankful servant to behave
as one should behave who has been excused the
debt he could not pay, cancelled all his acquittal
and left him with the weight of the old debt
rolled back upon him to his destruction.
Lastly, and in one \vord, it must never be left
out of sight that even the initial movement of

1 Acts xxvi. 18, i. e. forgiveness and fel10wship in the consecrated
body, the new Israel j cf. xx. 3
.

Chrzst our propz"tz"atlo1Z 143

faith, the taking Christ at His ,vord and believ-
ing His promises, involves the element of moral
allegiance. His gracious person and character
attract even while the boon is being accepted,
and a ne\v motive enters into life. Justifying
faith at its very root is a faith which yields
allegiance to its object.

H.

To a Jew, and to almost all races when
St. Paul \vrote, the idea of an expiatory sacri-
fice for sin seemed natural and obvious. But for
the special Christian doctrine of expiation the
basis is to be found in the memorable chapter liii
of the 'later Isaiah.' That great prophet of
the captivity is assuring Israel of their restora-
tion to their o\vn land. This restoration is to
follow on the due punishment of her sins-' She
hath received of the Lord's hands double for
all her sins.' And the restored people is to
be, before all else, a righteous people-' all
righteous '-a people of God's favour, because
they are living according to God. But there is
so much sin still remaining in them as to make
it necessary that the ne,v life of the recovered
people should be based on a great act of pro-

144 Tile EpIstle to tlte ROillallS

pitiation. The Righteous Servant of Jehovah,
who is, at starting, the idealized people itself,
but who comes to be represented as an in-
dividual acting for the people ,vhile repudiated
by them, offers his life a willing sacrifice for
their sins. The chastisement of their iniquities
falls on him, and he accepts the burden, and
is obedient unto death. Dying he makes his
soul a guilt offering: and, living through death
exalted and powerful, he becomes an inter-
cessor accepted \vith God, the head of a new
seed whom he ' justifies' before God by the
intimate kno\vledge of God's Inind and char-
acter ,vhich in his voluntary humiliation he has
,von. This \vonderful prophetic picture repre-
sents a vast advance in moral teaching on what
had gone before. It is not only that the self-
sacrifice of a perfect human ,vill is substituted
for the animal victims to \vhich the enlightened
conscience of God's people already refused to
allow any real efficacy; but also that the idea
of propitiation is put in a context where it is
made plain that it can only be the prelude to
a state of actual righteousness in those who are
to be justified by it. It occurs as part of the
answer to the question, not-How is Israel
to escape punishment?' but, How is Israel to

Clzrist our þroþzïzatz.oJl J 45

become the really righteous nation, living in the
likeness of God?
In the later books of the Maccabees we have
this idea of the expiatory sacrifice and inter-
cession of the
deal Israelite still retained, but
degraded, probably under Greek influences.
'And I, as my brethren,' says the Maccabean
martyr, , give up both body and soul for the laws
of our fathers, calling upon God that he may
speedily become gracious to the nation . . . and
that in me and my brethren may be stayed
the ,vrath of the Almighty, which hath been
justly brought upon our \vhole race 1.' I Be
propitious to my race,' prays Eleazar, in another
Alexandrian version of the story, 'being satisfied
with our punishment on their behalf. Make my
blood a propitiation for them, and receive my
life as a substitute for theirs 2.' These pass-
ages are on a lo\ver moral level than Isaiah's,
because in them the prominent idea of pro-
pitiation is that it is a means of procuring from
God exemption from further punishment, not
a step to the restoration to holiness. The idea
both of what God desires and of what man
desires is lower. And indeed all conceptions
of propitiation may be distinguished into true

1 :2 Mace. vii. 37.

2 4 Mace. vi. 28, 29.

I.

L

146 The EpIstle to the R011za11s

or false, according as righteousness or ex-
emption from punishment is the end which is
specially in view.
Thus \vhen \ve pass on into the New Testament
we find in Caiaphas' saying, 'It is expedient
for you that one man should die for the people,
and that the \vhole nation perish not 1,' the
typical expression of the quite immoral notion 2
of the forcible sacrifice of an innocent person
in order to exempt a guilty race from punish-
ment. In our Lord's teaching, on the other
hand, \ve find the doctrine of atonement raised
to its highest lTIoral po,ver. As the F ore-
runner had revived the teaching of the later
Isaiah by pointing to Him as I the Lamb of God
who taketh a,vay (i. e. taketh up and expiateth)
the sin of the world 3,' so Christ Himself spoke
unmistakeably of the ne\v covenant \vhich He
came to inaugurate, as to be based upon the
sacrificial offering of His body and the out-
pouring of His blood 4 : spoke also of 'the
remission of sins' as the benefit to be expected

1 John xi. 50.
2 None the less immoral as Caiaphas intended it, because, as
St. John perceives, a divine truth uttered itself through his lips
(John xi. 51).
3 John i. 29-
· Matt. xxvi. 28; Luke xxii. 19; I Cor. xi. 24.

Chrzst our þroþlïiatzoJl 147

from His expiation. But no teacher in the
wor]d ever made it so plain that God can be
satisfied with nothing that any other can do for
us-with nothing but actual likeness to Him in
ourselves. No teacher ever made it so plain
that what we are to desire is not to be let off
punishment, but to be actually freed from sin.
He left no room for doubt that only by following
His steps, even to the cross and surrender of our
lives, can \ve share His fellowship. The very
life which is offered in sacrifice to lay the founda-
tion of the new covenant is a life or spirit
which we are to share. We are to eat and drink
His sacrificed flesh and blood -the blood which
is the life-and so to be one with Him and He
with us. He sacrificed Himself, in other words,
in order to make possible, through His life and
Spirit, a ne\v covenanted society, in which men
should have perfect fello\\Tship with God and
with one another. He did not reject the idea
of a propitiation won for man by His vicarious
sacrifice-the truth is far from that-but He
keeps it in inseparable connexion with the ,
life which is to be based upon it; and in the
eucharist He brought back the idea of sacrifice
to what had been its starting- point in all
primitive usages. I The one point, , says Pro-
L2

148 The Eþlstle to the ROlltans

fessor Robertson-Smith, 'that comes out clear
and strong (from the examination of ancient
sacrificial customs), is that the fundamental idea
of ancient sacrifice is sacramental communion,
and that all atoning rites are ultimately to be
regarded as o,ving their efficacy to a commu-
nication of divine life to the worshipper, and
to the establishment or confirmation of a living
bond between them and their God 1.'
Still Christ's sacrifice of propitiation, to ,vhich
\ve contribute nothing, in which ,ve do not
share, remains a necessary prelude to the
establishment of the new life, It is in virtue
of this that we are justified and accepted and
allowed to start afresh. This fact the New
Testament in general takes for granted, and
offers no explanation of it; as indeed the human
heart has in general accepted the benefit in all
thankfulness and asked no questions. But the
speculative modern intellect has found a diffi-
culty in the matter-in the matter at least as
commonly represented-and \ve have noticed
that a suggestion of explanation is made by
St. Paul in this passage. God had long gone on
'passing over' sin all over the \vorld in loving
forbearance, bearing ,vith all men's sinfulness,
1 Robertson-Smith, Religion of 'hi! Semites (Black, 1889), p. 418.

Chrzst our proþzïzatzon 149

till they had th0roughly learnt the lesson of
their own need of God and inability to save
themselves. But this very forbearance rendered
God's character liable to complete misunder-
standing. He might have been supposed to
be kind indeed, but indifferent to sin. i These
things hast thou done and I kept silence: thou
thoughtest that I was altogether such an one
as thyself 1.' Thus the severity manifested in
the claim of the (righteous Father' upon the
Son of Man, His claim of an obedience unto
the shedding of His blood, and the ready
response to His claim on the part of the Son
of Man gladly rendering up His life in homage
to the Father-these taken together, the claim
of the Father and the sacrifice of the Son,
vindicated \vithin the area of the Christian
faith the true character of God, and forced the
believer in Jesus to hold the severity and the
love in their inseparable unity as making up
the divine righteousness.
Does not this thought open at least an in-
telligible vista into the mystery of the Atone-
ment? Christ is the Son of Man. He is to
inaugurate the true manhood. But first He
must deal with the manhood that has p"one
o

1 p
' {; cf. Eccles. viii. II.

ISO The Eþlstle to the R0111ans

astray, and make an act of reparation to the
Father for all the. outrage that our sins have
done I-lim. Thus in contrast to all our self-
pleasing, self-indulgence, self-excusing, in con-
trast to all our clamorous insolence towards
God and indifference to His laws, we behold
the Son of Man recognizing the Father's strict
requirements, and lifting before His eyes, in the
name of the manhood which He represents,
the great reparation of an unshrinking obedience
and loyalty unto death. The Father spared
not His only Son the natural consequences of
obedience in a \vorld of sin. The Son spared
not Himself, but shed His blood-the 'blood
which is the life '-at the Father's will. This
is the one full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice,
oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the
whole world. It is the sacrifice offered in the
power of nothing less than 'eternal spirit.'
Henceforth, then, no man can come to God
in faith in Jesus, in the faith which even at its
root is moral allegiance, and think lightly either
of God's holiness or of his o\vn or others' sin.
r God forgives him his sin, but it cost Him much
l, to forgive it. The Cross is the measure of the
, antipathy between God and sin.
And it is \vel! to notice ho\v the great

Clzrzst our proþzïl'atzon 151

thought of this passage is made intelligible to
the ordinary English reader again, only by the
Revised Version. In the old Bible the word
signifying I passing over' of sins is translated
I remission' - the very thing with \vhich it is in
fact contrasted. It is not an exaggeration to
say that, in this and very many places of the
epistles, the Revised Version for the first time
renders the thought of the apostles again in-
telligible to the English reader. And if the
Revised Version is not popular, as the book-
sellers tell us it is not, this is, I fear, only a sign
that the majority of English Christians do not
really care to understand the meaning of the
message with which, as a matter of words, they
are so familiar.

111.
The metaphor of ' redemption' and the meta-
phor of 'propitiation' complete and check one
another. As in the parables it is only the
exact point of comparison bet\veen the earthly
and the heavenly which can be pressed for the
spiritual lesson, so it is with these metaphorical
words, ,vhich are in fact parables compressed.
The \vord 'redemption' is meant to suggest
a price paid by God, or by Christ, for our being

152 The Eþlstle to the ROl1zans

made fr
; it is the price of the Son's death.
He 'gives His lif
a ransom for many.' The
word 'propitiation' again is meant to suggest
that the offering of the life in sacrifice was the
means to win for us forgiveness from God. So
far, both metaphorical \vords have their clear
and harmonious meaning. But in old days
the metaphor of redemption was ,vorked out by
Origen and others beyond the exact point of
the original suggestion. The price, they argued,
must have been paid to the enemy who held us
captive; i. e. Christ's life was offered as a price
to the devil in order that his claim might be
satisfied and \ve might be justly set free. But
this extension of the scope of the metaphor is
\vholly alien to the New Testament. On the
other hand, the idea of propitiation has sug-
gested at many periods the horrible notion that
the Son wrung from the angry Father the pardon
which He \vas unwilling to give. Such a notion
is again wholly alien to the N ew Testament.
But in fact the t\VO metaphors are mutually
corrective; and each tends to exclude the misuse
of the other. The idea that Christ offered
anything to the devil is corrected by the notion
inherent in the phrase 'propitiation (of the
Father).' What the Son offered \vas a sacrifice

Chrzst our þroþz
ialion 153

directed to the Father only. On the other
hand, the idea that the mind of the
"'ather
needed to be changed to\vards us, is corrected
by the suggestion inherent in the other metaphor
of redemption; for it is He who, because He
loved us, gave up His o\vn Son to buy us out
of the slavery of sin. Each metaphor suggests
a single idea-each complementary of the other,
and corrective of its misuse-and both combine
to tell us of the one inseparable love of the
Father and the Son, uniting in a sacrificial act
which is ascribed to both, to redeem us from the
tyranny of sin and to set the pardoning love
free to work upon us, \vithout obscuring the true
hatefulness of sin or the true character of God.

I
especially recently, the doctrine of the
atonement 1 has involved intellectual difficulty,
on the other hand it has proved itself, as the
popular Christian literature of all ages sufficiently
shows, widely and deeply welcome to the human
heart. This wide welcome which it has received
shows that it contains a deep truth. And from
this point of vie\v, from the point of vie\v of our
practical spiritual needs, ,ve do ,yell to meditate

1 On some of the difficulties felt about the doctrine of the
Atonement, see app. note D.

154 TIle Epls/le to the ROl1zans

much and deeply upon this doctrine. We can
depend upon it, that if ,ve are to go on patiently
doing good in a \vorld like this, so full of dis-
appointments and anxieties and moral failures
and torturing scruples, \ve must have peace at
the heart. And this is \vhat the really evangelical
doctrine is capable of giving us. It bids us
continually look out of ourselves up to God,
and assures us that His love, manifested in the
sacrifice of His Son, is there continually, un-
changeably. It is there, waiting till first ,ve
turn to Him, to give us the assurance of entire
absolution and admission into the divine fellow-
ship, wholly irrespective of \vhat \ve have been
or done; and it is there continually, ho\vever
often \ve fall, with the same large and liberal
hand to pour out continual forgivenesses, and
never \vearies of restoring us again and again
to the solid foundation of the peace and grace
\vhich are by Jesus Christ. Weare not meant
to be miserably anxious or morbidly intro-
spective. We must confess our sins, and that
\vith exactness, without self-sparing, without
self-excusing, in utter humility and truth; but
'if ,ve confess our sins, he is faithful and just
to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from
all unrighteousness.'

The true seed of A hralza1Jz 155

DIVISION II.
2. CHAPTER IV.
The true seed of Abraham.
ST. PAUL has been repudiating the principle
of justification by works of the law. To those
with whom he had been brought up, this was in
the highest degree to dishonour the J e,vish law,
and indeed the principle of divinely-given law
at all. But in the last words of the previous
chapter he refuses to admit this inference. 'God
forbid that \ve should make law of none effect.
Nay, we establish la\v.'
This idea of the Gospel, rightly understood, t
establishing the law even while it superseded it, ,
is with St. Paul a very favourite one, and he
elaborates it in different ,vays Sometimes he
shows how the function of the written law, or
'the letter,' is only to awaken the conscience
and make men know their sinfulness. I t can
give men no help in corresponding to the moral
requirement which it expresses. Having con-

156 The Eþlstle to tlze Ronlans

victed the conscience of sin, it has done its work,
and must yield its place to a more effective
\ spiritual agency. The letter killeth, in order
that the Spirit may give life to those ,vhom it has
killed. And, on the other hand, the one object
of this new spiritual agency, this life-giving
Spirit, is to infuse the po\ver of moral obedience,
which the law could not give, into men's lives,
'that the requirement of the law might be ful-
filled in us \vho walk after the Spirit.' In this
place, however, St. Paul only alludes to this
argument and in the main adopts another. He
shows from the Book of the Law, that the father
of the faithful, himself the typical instance of a
justified man, was justified, not by works which
he had done, but simply because he believed; not
upon the basis of any law or covenant, but as
a man simply and not as a circumcised man;
and again, that David, the man after God's o\vn
heart, living under the law, would have us rest
our hopes of blessedness, not on our merits as
having kept the law, but simply on the forgiving
bounty of divine grace
Let us inquire, he says, into the case of
Abraham, whom we Jews are proud to own
for our national ancestor. What are ,ve to say
of him? If Abraham approached God in virtue

TIle true seed of Abraha111 157

of his merits in having kept a law, and so was
accepted by God because of what he had done
of himself, there is something for him to boast
of. But this in fact is not his relation to God
according to the scripture at all. There-

'merit lives from man to man,
But not from man, 0 Lord, to thee.'

The \vhole initiation is God's. He simply
makes a promise of His own pure goodwill-
'Thy seed shall be as the stars of heaven'-
and Abraham simply believed Him; and this,
and nothing but this, ,vas' counted to him for
rIghteousness 1.' The hvo suggested relations
of Abraham to God are broadly contrasted and
can be generally applied. In the one case you
have a compact between God who imposes,
and man who accepts, an allotted task \vith a
payment attached to its fulfilment. If the man
fulfils it, his payment can be classed as due to
him under the compact. In the other case you
have nothing done, no claim alleged, but a pure
act of God, accepting one of our sinful race, as
he is, simply because he takes God at His word.
And this is how David also views our relation to
God. You find him 2 opening his mouth to tell

1 Gen. xv. 5, 6.

2 Ps. xxxii.

158 The Epistle to the ROJJzans

us what sort of man is truly blessed, truly to be
congratulated. And he thinks not of one who
claims a reward because of his merit, but of one
who has found no comfort or resource except in
penitent confession of his sins, and whose sins
God has forgiven and has consented to treat as
if they did not exist. It is the unmerited act of
the divine bounty, it is God justifying the sinful,
which is the source of blessedness (vers. 1-8).
N o\v we go back to the case of Abraham to
inquire whether the blessing of divine acceptance
was pronounced upon him because he was the
head of the chosen race marked out by circum-
cision-which was, so to speak, the first part of
the law. No, it was before he was circumcised.
The token of circumcision came afterwards 1, as
the seal or external confirmation of what he had
already received simply as a believing man; so
that he might have for his true sons believers,
whether uncircumcised or circumcised, and they
might share his acceptance simply by believing
God as he believed Him (vers. 9-12).
Plainly when God made Abraham the promise
that he should be the heir of the world 2, no law

J Gen. xvii.
2 None of the promises are verbally to this effect. But this is
the substantial outcome of them.

The true seed of A bra/zaln 159

was introduced into the relationship. I twas
purely a matter of God prolnising and Abraham
taking God at His word. Indeed it could not
have been othe
vise. Introduce la\v, and you
introduce a compact between God and man
\vhich annuls the relationship of God simply
promising and man simply believing-a compact
,vhich throws a strain on man's independent
powers, which they are not able to bear. The
one inevitable result of the law is to put man in
the position, in which apart from law he can-
not find himself, of a defaulter who knows him-
self, as a defaulter, under the divine ,vrath. The
true relationship leaves matters in the hands of
God, who purely promises of His good favour
-man simply in faith receiving (vers. 13- 16 a).
This resting everything on God's promise and
man's faith gives security for the fulfilment of
the promise to 'all the seed.' And the' seed to
whom the promise was made' includes, not only
the race chosen later to receive the law, but
believers of all races; Abraham being in this
sense 'a father of many nations,' as he stands
under the eyes of God whom he believed in-
God who had power to make His promise good,
even by recalling to life again the dead faculties
of Abraham's old age, and summoning children

160 TIle Epistle to the ROl1tallS

,vhich did not yet exist as if they were already
there. Here is tbe point: Abraham believed that
God had the power to be as good as His ,vord,
in spite of all obvious reasons to the contrary.
Therefore he looked the facts steadily in the
face-his own and Sarah's great age. But he
did not suffer this to weigh in the balance
against God's promise. He made quite sure that
God would do as He promised, and glorified
God by this strong act of faith. This it is that
,vas reckoned to him for righteousness, i.e. this
it is that enabled God to accept him as righteous
without any consideration of deeds done. And
the record of this acceptance is made for our
sakes to-day. God is still taking men into the
number of the righteous, and He still does it on
the same principle. He will reckon us for
righteous if we will take Him at His word, and
believ
in His po,ver to do as He has promised.
And in our case He has given us fresh ground
for such confident belief; for Jesus, on whom as
Lord our hopes rest and who died to make
atonement for our sins, He has by His power
raised up from the dead, that by faith in Him,
dead and yet alive again, we might be taken
]ike Abraham without more ado into the number
of the righteous.

The true seed of A bra/zal1z 161

What then shall we say 1 that Abraham, our forefather
according to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham was
justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not
toward God. For what saith the scripture? And Abra-
ham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for
righteousness. Now to him that worketh, the re\vard is
not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt. But to him that
worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the
ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness. Even
as David also pronounceth blessing upon the man, unto
whom God reckoneth righteousness apart from \vorks,
saying,
Blessed are they \vhose iniquities are forgiven,
And \vhose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not
reckon sin.
Is this blessing then pronounced upon the circumcision,
or upon the uncircumcision also? for \ve say, To Abra-
hanl his faith was reckoned for righteousness. How then
was it reckoned? \vhen he was in circumcision, or in un-
circumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision :
and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the
righteousness of the faith \vhich he had \vhile he \\Tas in
uncircumcision: that he raight be the father of all them
that believe, though they be in uncircumcision, that
righteousness might be reckoned unto them; and the
father of circumcision to them who not only are of the
circumcision, but \vho also walk in the steps of that faith
of our father Abraham which he had in uncircumcision.
For not through the la\v \vas the promise to Abraham or
to his seed, that he should be heir of the world, but
through the righteousness of faith. For if they \vhich are

1 Or 'of Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh'
(margin) .
I. 11

162 Tlte Eplstle to the R011lanS

of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise is
made of none effect: for the law worketh wrath; but
\vhere there is no law, neither is there transgression.
For this cause it is of faith, that it 1nay be according to
grace; to the end that the promise may be sure to all the
seed; not to that only \vhich is of the law, but to that also
\vhich is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us
all (as it is written, A father of many nations have I nlade
thee) before him \vhom he believed, eVe1t God, who
quickeneth the dead, and calleth the things that are not,
as though they \vere. Who in hope believed against
hope, to the end that he might become a father of many
nations, according to that which had been spoken, So
shall thy seed be. And without being \veakened in faith
he considered his own body no\v as good as dead (he
being about a hundred years old), and the deadness of
Sarah's womb: yea, looking unto the promise of God, he
wavered not through unbelief, but \vaxed strong through
faith, giving glory to God, and being fully assured that,
\vhat he had promised, he was able also to perform.
Wherefore also it \vas reckoned unto him for righteous-
ness. N ow it was not written for his sake alone, that it
was reckoned unto him; but for our sake also, unto whom
it shall be reckoned, \vho believe on him that raised Jesus
our Lord from the dead, who \vas delivered up for our
trespasses, and was raised for our justification.

I. No doubt, on the text of Gen. xv. 6,
5t. Paul is right. It was Abraham's fat"th that
is declared to have been reckoned to his account
by God as equivalent to righteousness. But
when we get beyond a mere text, is it not, we
are inclined to ask, more true to the general

The true seed of Abraham 16 3

spirit of scripture to say, with the author of the
First Book of the Maccabees, , Was not Abraham
found faithful in temptation, and it was reckoned
unto him for righteousness I?' or with St. James,
, Was not Abraham our father justified by
works, in that he offered up Isaac his son upon
the altar? Thou seest that faith wrought with
his works, and by works \vas faith made perfect 2 .'
No doubt certain Rabbis state the principle
pedantically when they speak of Abraham having
kept the ,vhole Mosaic la\v by anticipation 3, but
is it not true to say that Abraham was accepted
by God, and on the whole is represented in the
Bible as so accepted, not only because he be-
lieved, but also because he 'was found faithful
in temptation,' and did good works, or acted
as a good man?
N ow, if by 'accepted' is meant 'finally ac-
cepted,' St. Paul would say this as of Abraham,
so of every other accepted man. He must be
finally judged and must receive according to
his works or character. As \ve shall see, there
is no real discrepancy between St. Paul and
St. James on this matter. And St. Paul never
disparages 'good works' which are the fruit of

1 I Macc. ii. 52; cr. Ecc1us. xliv. 20.
2 James ii. 21, 22. S Cf. S. and H. p. 101.
M2

16 4 Tile Epistle to the R0111ans

faith, only I works' or ' \vorks of the la\v' \vhich
represent a fals
attitude of man to God. But
the question which he is here asking is, What
is the ground of acceptance for a man at
starting? What is it puts him at starting in
the right relation to God? In other words,
What is the root of real righteousness? And
his answer to this question is, it is only self-
surrendering faith which brought Abraham, or
\vhich brings any other man, into acceptance.
In giving this ans\ver St. Paul had in vie\v
another attitude with which he had been long
familiar, and ,vhich he calls I seeking to be
justified by works of the la\v.' It was the atti-
tude of the Jews, especially as they appear in
51. John's Gospel. They were proud of their
divine law and of belonging to the chosen
people, the children of Abraham and Moses.
They knew how to make good their standing-
ground ,vith God. By keeping the law, as
the law had come to be understood among
themselves, they could accumulate merits alto-
gether out of proportion to their failures or
demerits. They could even be helped by the
merits of the old saints 1. Thus they could

1 There is contemporary evidence for this illustration of their
position; see Ephesians, app. note C.

The true seed of Abra/la1i2 16 5

stand before God on the basis of a certain
engagement or covenant, into \vhich God had
entered with His people, and claim their due
reward.
This utterly demoralizing attitude-leading as
it does to formalism and hypocrisy, or, at the
best, unprogressive stagnation-this attitude,
which left out of sight all the higher and infinite
elements in the Old Testament, was the actual
attitude of contemporary Pharisaic Jews. The
characteristics \vith which it endowed them
,vere pride in the law; a sense of personal merit
coupled with a contempt for 'sinners of the
Gentiles,' or the common 'people which knew
not the law'; a self-satisfied stagnation which
made them utterly resent the ne\v light of the
gospel; a regard for the public opinion of their
class, \vhich made them slaves to convention;
and moral hollowness and rottenness \vithin. It
was because this was their attitude that they
rejected the Christ. 'Going about to establish
their o\vn righteousness, they did not submit
themselves to the righteousness of God.' It
was because St. Paul had been brought up in
the school of the Pharisees, but had come to
perceive its moral rottenness and to accept
Jesus as the Christ, that he bases all his doc-

166 Tile EPistle to the ROl1ZallS

trine on the substitution of justification by faith
for justification by works.
By '\vorks' or I works of the law' he means
an attitude towards God which left a man
largely independent of Him. Under the divine
covenant the man of the covenant has a certain
task to do, a certain law to keep: that kept,
especially in its external requirements as con-
temporary authority enforces it, he is his o\vn
master. He is entitled to resent any further
claims upon him. This religious ideal means,
as we have seen, pride, stagnation, conven-
tionalism, hypocrisy. And the more it is con-
sidered the more unnatural it appears. For
(I) It ignores the fundamental relation of man
to God, viz. that, as a creature, he depends
absolutely and at every stage on God. He has
no initiative in himself. Thus the only attitude
towards God which expresses the reality is
one in \vhich God is recognized as continually
supplying, or promising, or offering, or claiming,
and man is continually accepting, or believing,
or corresponding, or obeying.
(2) It ignores the ineradicable taint of sin in
man, and the accumulated guilt of particular
sins. A man may gloss over his inward sinful-
ness, and cloak and ignore his secret sins; he

The true seed of A bralzauz 16 7

may live outwardly in high reputation; but if
he comes to know himself, he kno\vs hin1self as
a sinner, who depends, at starting, absolutely
on God for forgiveness and 'deliverance from
coming wrath.'
(3) It is quite contented to leave all mankind,
except a small elect body, out of the conditions
of acceptance ,vith God.
In substituting 'faith' for works of the law,
then, as the principle of justification, St. Paul
was really 'returning to nature'; he was
realizing facts, and supplying a basis for a
morality both progressive and universal.
Further, he was true to all the highest teach-
ing of the Old Testament, which continually
finds the source and ground of sin and failure in I
man's independence of God; \vhich is averse to
nothing so conspicuously as to substituting ex-
ternal conformity for moral character; which is
heavy with the consciousness of sin; which
humbly expects a fuller, wider, and richer dis-
closure of the kingdom of God. Finally, he was
true to that deep and summary teaching of our
Lord to the Jews, 'This is the \vork of God,
that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.' No
doubt it may still be said St. Paul argues in an
I uncritical' manner on the basis of a particular

168 Tile Epzslle to the R0112a1Zs

text. But in doing this he \vas doing as his
J e\vish contemporaries did; and if the par-
ticular text is used to prove a real or true
principle, \vho shall complain of it?
2. And now to conciliate St. Paul and 5t.
J ames. It is a satisfactory task, for the state-
ments \vhich appear so contradictory admit,
\vhen they are examined, of an easy harmony.
Let us suppose, \vhat is highly probable, that
the report of St. Paul's teaching reached St.
J ames at Jerusalem at second-hand, in a frag-
mentary and perverted manner-perhaps as
illustrated by unfortunate specimens of its in-
fluence "vhere it \vas wilfully misunderstood.
'Men are justified before God by faith \vithout
consideration of works.' St. James' holy and
beautiful, but no doubt some\vhat unphilo-
sophical mind, \vas alarmed and scandalized.
By faith he understood an intellectual quality-
. the acceptance of the divine truth revealed;
and he points out with the simplicity of moral
common sense, that never in the Old Testament
is right belief represented as the ground of
acceptance with God ,vithout the right conduct
which is its natural sequence. Who can deny
that the devils have a I right belief' in the
existence of God? Faith, in fact, \vithout

The true seed of A brahan1, 16 9

works-orthodox belief \vithout moral obedience
-is a lifeless form, a body without spirit 1.
To all this St. Paul would of course have
agreed, in St. James' sense of the word faith.
In fact, St. James' faith, i. e. bare orthodox
belief, is closely akin to, and apt to keep com-
pany with, formal ecclesiastical observance,
,vhich is part of what St. Paul means by
, works.' Both were characteristic of the Phari-
saic J e\vs. St. Paul and St. James would have
been at one in saying, 'There must be life in
this dead shell of orthodox belief, if it is to have
value \vith God; and what alone can give it life
is the real spirit of moral obedience to the will
of the holy and good God '-which is ,vhat
St. James means by 'works.' The disagree-
ment bet\veen them is then, so far, only verbal.
But St. Paul goes deeper, into a region ,vhere
St. James does not follow him, and asks what is
the real starting-ground of the truest obedience
-the real root of the moral life ? And he finds
this starting-ground, this fundamental establish-
ment of the right relation to God, in what he
called faith; that is, no mere orthodoxy of in-
tellect, but a fundamental relationship of man
towards God-the utterly receptive faculty,
1 James ii. 14- 26 .

170 Tile EpIstle to tIle R01J/alls

the profound quality of the self-surrendering
will.
.
3. There is a young philosophical inquirer
in Plato's Dialogue of the Reþuhlz.c who is so
anxious to get at the ultimate principle of justice,
as distinct from its consequences and secondary
qualities, that Socrates laughingly tells him he
is I scrubbing and polishing it like a statue.'
Now S1. Paul has the philosopher's instinct to
get at a principle in its pure simplicity. He
scrubs faith clean of all extraneous accidents.
He is most anxious that we should disengage
its activity from all the other closely-intercon-
nected elements in human nature; and so per-
ceive that, whatever a man has been or is in
race or conduct or antecedents, once let him
exhibit faith, the faith \vhich takes God at His
word, and by that very fact and no other, all the
obstacles to God's acceptance of him are over-
come. The true relation of the man to God
is restored in its elementary principle. And
nothing but this, however elaborate its apparent
performances, can restore the fundamental re-
lationship. It is faith only, and not works, how-
ever splendid, which justifies or enables God to
take a man, place him amongst the righteous,
and work upon and in him. But this elemental

The true seed of A brahal1z 17 1

act of simply abandoning independence, tramp-
ling on pride and taking God at His word, is an
act or attitude of the whole man which neces-
sarily (granted that it be not ,vithdrawn) becomes
correspondence of the whole being with God,
a lifelong obedience, an allegiance and homage
of every faculty of will, and emotion, and intellect.
, Faith,' then, as Calvin once said, 'is pregnant I'
\vith good works, but it justifies before they are
brought forth.'
That the rudimentary justifying faith, on which
51. Paul is here insisting, is a developing thing,
a living and germinating principle, the basis of
a life which grows-but always 'from faith to
faith,' from one stage of faith to another-will
appear clearly enough as we go on. But even
here, in this chapter, it appears already that
faith is something quite inconsistent with re-
maining as we are. Faith looks to a divine
promise-a promise of astounding change-
and believes that God is able to realize it in
us. Such was Abraham's faith. Such, we may
add, was the faith of those in the Gospels who
came to be healed, and to whom it was said,
'According to your faith be it unto you.' OUf
faith then also must expect and desire some
amazing transformation of our human nature,

172 The Epistle to the ROnta1Zs

according to a divine promise-nothing less than
power out of impotence, life out of death.
And it is from this point of view that the
Resurrection is apparently regarded in .this
chapter, as holding the place it does in the
I scheme' of our justification by faith. We
are to believe that God is able to bring life
morally out of death. He makes that act of
faith possible or easier for us by the resur-
rection of Jesus Christ. This evidence of God's
po\ver in the case of Jesus, the person on whom
our divine faith is to rest, gives an adequate
support and reasonable security to our faith.
I He was designated as the Son of God with
power, by the resurrection from the dead,'
and thus becon1es the natural object for such
a faith in the power of God to carry out His
promises as is necessary for our justification.
This is probably the meaning of the particular
\vords with \vhich the fourth chapter closes-
I Who died for our sins (that is, in order that,
in virtue of His atoning sacrifice, our sins might
be fo.rgiven) and rose again for our justification'
(i. e. in order that our faith Inight have in the
risen Lord an adequate object). But of course
the relation of faith to the risen Lord is by no
means exhausted in this thought.

The true seed of Abralza1n 173

4. We Englishmen are possessed with the
idea that there is nothing so alien to our char-
acters as the temper of the Pharisees or the
doctrine of the merit of good works. But if we
can look at the matter below the surface, we
can hardly fail to realize that the spirit which
St. Paul so mightily repudiates lies in some
respects very close to our natural instincts. The
Englishman has a standard, of his class, his
college, his profession, which it is his pride not
to fall short of; but he is intensely alarmed at
any claim upon his moral independence over
and above this allowed standard; he is inclined
to turn his back completely upon the idea of
fundamental surrender to the unkno\vn and in-
finite claim of God; he is contented with himself
and his standard, and occupies himself in com-
paring it favourably with the standards of other
classes, or still more of other nations. But
what is this spirit but, for good or for evil, the
spirit of Pharisaism under a wholly different
dress? I They going about to establish their
own righteousness, have not submitted them-
selves to .the righteousness of God.' 'How can
ye believe which seek glory one of another,
and the glory that cometh from the only God
ye seek not?' · They measuring themselves by

174 The Eþzs/le to the ROlnans

themselves and comparing themselves amongst
themselves are not wise.' Here are typical con-
demnations of the self-satisfied Pharisaic temper
so expressed as to prevent us from supposing
that ,ve shall escape condemnation with the
Pharisees merély because we do not say long
prayers in public places, or distinguish ourselves
by a careful ritualism.

The accepted life

175

DIVISION III. CHAPTERS V-VIII.

The accepted life or the 1noral conseque11ces of
justificatz'on.

I. CHAPTER v. I-II.
The holy confidence of the justified.
PEACE is a fundamental spiritual need of the
human soul. But the peace that is God's gift
comes only through the breaking up of the
peace of soul which comes from ignoring God.
The Pharisee on the temple steps was at peace
when he thanked God that he was not as other
men are-at peace in his misplaced pride. The
mass of men in heathen Corinth, where St. Paul
was \vriting, were at peace in their sins. And
St. Paul has set himself with all his might, as
in his preaching generally, so in this particular
letter, to break up this false peace of conscience.
Like the prophet of old he spurns those who
would' heal the hurt of the daughter of God's

176 TIle Eplstle to tlze ROl1ZallS

people lightly, saying, Peace, peace, when there
is no peace.' Thus he has been arousing the
conscience of Gentiles and Jews equally, and
forcing upon them the conviction that their pre-
sent life is a condemned life, under the doom of
a righteous God. But when the conviction is
driven home, when the wound is fairly recog-
nized and probed, comes in due course the
healing remedy. I t lies in the recognition of
\vhat God really is-of the sort of character
which He is manifesting now in His Son Jesus
Christ. For behold! wholly apart from any
question of what we are or have been, God
is found waiting for us with the offer of His
love, which is also the power to accomplish
what He offers. It is pardon and new life He
offers to us. It is for us simply to take Him
at His word, and without any delay or reckoning
up of accounts, to be acquitted and accepted for
righteous simply because W
have believed His
word.
The secure ground of peace in the soul, there-
fore, lies in the frank and severe recognition of
our own sinfulness, but also, and even more, in
looking away from ourselves and simply fixing
our whole consideration on the character of
God, who in certain acts has shown His good-

The acceþted life

177

will toward us, and His power to make His
goodwill effectual. All hope for us starts simply
from God and His mind of love toward us.
e Not that we loved God, but that he loved
us and sent his Son.'
Thus we find St. Paul, in the passage we
are now to consider, beginning a fresh appeal
to believers in Christ on this basis, which he
has already made so secure. Seeing, he says,
that we have now been accepted simply because
we believed, let us enter into that heritage of
peace which our Lord Jesus Christ by His
redemption has won for us. For what is our
present condition? 1"hrough 1-lis redeeming
sacrifice we have received an introduction, at
no other cost than that of believing, into a new
standing-ground before God, a new state in
which the whole atmosphere is one of grace
or divine favour. We can therefore enjoy a
solid peace in the present based on the sure
consideration of the divine good\vill, and we
can make it our boast that ,\\Te have a well-
grounded hope of future restoration to that
highest fruition of \vhich our nature is capable
-fellowship in the divine glory. And while
we enjoy these present privileges of ours, let
us show that \ve really value them by making
I. N

178 Tile Eplstle to the ROl1tans

the ouhvard hardships which accompany them
a matter of boasting also. For we know that
only such hardships, bravely encountered, can
give to our characters the quality of steadfast-
ness; and steadfastness through the experience
of life makes of us men of approved moral
metal; and this process of probation, in which
we are tried and not found wanting, again
generates hope in us-the same hope in God's
love \vhich accompanied the beginning of our
justification, only now confirmed in us by our
o\vn experience. And this divine hope has
nothing treacherous about it 1. It is grounded
on what God has already done. He has already
given us His Holy Spirit, and by that gift
poured forth His love into our hearts: He
would not have done this in order to cheat
us at the last.
We can indeed test and measure the mind
of God toward us by human comparisons. In
our experience of men we might perhaps find
some one brave enough even to die for another,
if that other was, I do not say merely an upright
man, but a good and loveable one. But what
is the fact in God's dealings with us? It was

1 Isa. xxviii. 16: C He that believeth shall not be put to shame'
(Greek version).

TIle acceþted life

179

when we were sinful and helpless in our sinful-
ness-nay rather, when we were living in flat
antagonism to God-that He proved His own
pure love toward us by taking advantage of the
divine opportunity to give His Son to die for
us. And He, thus dying on our behalf, won
for us by the shedding of His blood a recon-
ciliation with God, which lay altogether outside
anything which our state naturally suggested.
Well then, God would not, so to speak, have
gone out of His way to make this beginning,
unless He had intended to carry the work
through, so as finally to save us out from
under the divine wrath, or, in other words,
into the divine fellowship. Certainly, accepted
as we have been in virtue of Christ's blood-
shedding, and thus reconciled to God when
our natural state was hostility to Him, we can
trust Him, now that He has made us His
friends, to accomplish our deliverance, not by
any further blood-shedding, but by admitting
us into the life of Christ risen from death.
But, to end where we began, it is not only
the hope of a future deliverance that makes us
glad. We also make our boast of our present
relation and friendship with God through His
Son.

N2

180 The Eþlstle to the Romans

Being therefore justified by faith, let us have peace
with God through our Lord Jesus Christ; through whom
also we have had our access by faith into this grace
wherein we stand; and let us rejoice in hope of the glory
of God. And not only so, but let us also rejoice in our
tribulations: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;
and patience, probation; and probation, hope: and hope
putteth not to shame; because the love of God hath been
shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Ghost which
\vas given unto us. For while we were yet weak, in due
season Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for
a righteous man will one die: for peradventure for the
good man some one would even dare to die. But God
commendeth his own love toward us, in that, while we
\vere yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then,
being now justified by his blood, shall we be saved from
the wrath of God through him. For if, while we were
enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of
his Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved
by his life; and not only so, but we also rejoice in God
through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have
now received the reconciliation.

I. We feel in this passage, and in those
which follow, that a great transition is being
accomplished, or has been accomplished, in the
argument, we hardly know how: the transition
from the thought of our preliminary justification
or acceptance with God for Christ's sake, to
that of our sanctification, or the life consecrated in
Christ: the transition from the thought of Christ's
work for 'Us to that of Christ's work ill, 'US: from

The acceþted life

181

the gift of acquittal to the gift of the Spirit (ver. 5),
and the life of the baptized (vi. 3)' S1. Paul is
not conscious of the transition, as modern theo-
logians or Christians acquainted with theological
controversy cannot but be, because the two stages
are to his mind absolutely inseparable. Those
to whonl he wrote had like himself come, with
whatever of struggle, to believe in Christ; be..
lieving, they had been baptized into Christ, and
had received by the laying on of hands the
gift of the Holy Ghost. This fellowship in
Christ's life, this possession of the Spirit, consti-
tuted Christianity. To enjoy these things was
to be a Christian. The idea of a Christianity
which stopped short of incorporation into Christ,
or \vhich claimed this incorporation outside His
body which is the Church, and apart from the
visible sacramental means of union, did not occur
to S1. Paul. A Christianity which did not own
allegiance to the Church was not in question.
But his entire present aim is to convince the
heart and reason of Christians that the whole
privilege of their new 'state of grace) belongs
to them simply in virtue of faith. As he asks
the Galatians: I Received ye the Spirit,' i. e. did
ye become Christians, ' by the works of the la\v
or by the hearing of faith?' That is his point.

182 Tile EpIstle to tlze R0112a1Zs

They were not made Christians because they had
done anything to deserve it. They were simply
helpless sinners, and it was the gratuitous mercy
of God which looked upon them and provided a
means of forgiveness for them, and justified them
or set them upon a new basis of acceptance,
without any consideration of \vhat they were or
had done, purely and simply because He loved
them and meant that the mere spectacle of His
unmerited love and bounty should inspire their
gratitude and win their hearts. Therefore he
lays such emphasis on their initial need of forgive-
ness: on their helplessness to get rid o{ their
own sins: on their dependence for forgiveness
on a sacrifice to \vhich they could contribute
nothing: on their being justified by simply re-
ceiving in trust the offer of God. But the offer
when it is listened to is found to consist in
forgiveness indeed-but forgiveness as a step
toward ne,v life in the body of Christ. Thus
what Christ won for man, \vhat becomes available
for each man in virtue of believing the message,
is here described as 'our introduction' (rather
than' access ') , into this grace wherein we stand'
-an introduction into a spiritual region where
God's favour is the prevailing atmosphere, or, to
use a later phrase, into 'a state of grace'; a dis-

Tlze acceþted life

18 3

trict of security out of \vhich, however, men
may fall again by deliberate unfaithfulness, as
St. Paul warns the Galatians 1: lYe are severed
from Christ, ye who would be justified by the
law; ye are fallen away from grace.'
And St. Paul's language does not let us
suppose that the \vhole of what he means by
our 'salvation' is included in our preliminary
acceptance 2. That is simply our first introduc-
tion into a permanent state. Our' salvation' is
here, as elsewhere, spoken of as equivalent to
deliverance from \vrath in the day of judgement,
which means that our whole moral being has
become such as can bear the scrutiny of the
divine righteousness and the fellowship of the
divine glory.
2. Where the Revised Version above 3 reads
I rejoice,' it is important to remember that the
word is that used for the illegitimate 'glorying 7
or 'boasting' of iii. 27 and iv. 2. Christians
have something to boast of, but it is not their
own; it is God's gift. Therefore they are
especially delighted when God's strength is
shown in their weakness, and they \vill more
particularly 'boast of their weaknesses' (cf. 2 Cor.
xi. 30).

1 Gal. v. 4.

2 cr. also p. 3 10 .

8 verses 2, 3, I I.

184 The Eplstle to the R01nans

3. S1. Paul's argument that the Christian hope
is fundamentally trustworthy is based, we may
notice, on a twofold appeal. First (ver. 5), he
appeals to the gift of the Spirit which at a definite
time 1 each Christian received, doubtless by the
laying on of hands. This gift is in itself an out.
pouring of the divine love and an ' earnest' of
future glory (2 Cor. i. 22, V. 5). No doubt almost
all the Christians had more or le
s intensely filt
the reality of the divine love in the indwelling
Spirit. But St. Paul lays stress rather on the fact
than on the feeling. Secondly (verso 6 ff.), he
appeals to the great redemptive act of God. God
had gone out of His way to make a great sacrifice
in order to reconcile us when we were enemies,
and therefore may be trusted to carry out the
preliminary reconciliation into full spiritual de-
liverance or salvation by Christ's life. The
greater effort carries with it the less.

1 The tense is an aorist, 'the Holy Ghost which was given' at
a definite past moment; not as in the unrevised Bible ' is given.'

The Second A dam 18 5

DIVISION III.
2. CHAPTER V. 12-21.

The Second Adanz.

ST. PAUL had spoken, at the end of the
passage we have just been reading, of our being
'saved by (or 'in ') Christ's life.' And this
brings him to what is truly the central point of
his theology-the life in Christ by the Spirit:
the thought that the glorified Man, with all the
power of the divine life at work in Him, though
He is hidden from sight, is still perpetuating His
life by His Spirit in that society which He has
established to be His body. It stands to reason
that if real fellowship in the life of Christ is
the privilege of the Christian, this must be
a greater thing by far than any preparatory gift
of acquittal or justification, which indeed has its
value simply in virtue of that to which it admits
us. St. Paul then loves to contrast the new

186 The Eþlstle to tlze ROl1zans

manhood of believers in Christ, the life in
Christ, in all its moral characteristics, with the
old manhood, enslaved to sin, as it existed sub-
stantially identical in its bondage under the
outwardly differing conditions of Gentile and
Jewish society. And as that old life of our
race had a unity which 51. Paul believed \vas
due to a common origin in the first man Adam,
so he thought of Christ as a second Adam-
the 'last Adam '-a spiritual progenitor from
whom was to be derived another human race
by spiritual generation with a better unity of its
o,vn; or rather a new spiritual progenitor from
\vhom the \vhole of the old race might gradually
derive, by spiritual regeneration, a new life,
,vhich should penetrate and spread, and oust
the corruption of the old manhood, till the whole
,vas redeemed and ushered into the glory for
which it had been originally destined.
And here, in the passage we are no\v to read,
51. Paul develops the thought of the influence
of Adam and his sin upon the human race, and
draws from it an argument for the deeper and
greater influence of the New Man upon the
same race, reconstituted under a new head.
Adam's sin-the disobedience of the one man
-had a disastrous effect upon his race as a

The Second A dant 187

whole. It introduced sin, and through sin its
penalty, death; and it passed to all mankind-
the penalty, because also the sin. All men
sinned in fact, and all died. This can be stated
without exception. It is quite true that where
there is no special law to instruct men, they
may sin ignorantly, and therefore without its
being imputed to them as guilt; yet the sin is
there all the same, and its presence, before the .
IYlosaic law ,vas given to enlighten men, \vas
marked by the reign of death, even in the case
of persons innocent of any actual sin like
Adam's. Sin then, as marked by death, exists
universally, apart from any kno\vledge of it or
even any actual offence, as the effect of Adam's
transgression upon his whole race. But to Adam
corresponds in the divine purpose Christ. He
is the new head of the race-to transmit the
free gift of life, as Adam transmitted the penalty
of death. His life was one summary obedience:
one perfectly acceptable object to the eyes of
God. And there flows from it an abundant river
of the good favour of God-which is also the
good favour of the man Jesus Christ-and of
the gift by which that good favour sho,,'s
itself, the gift of righteousness extending on
into an eternal life. Therefore we may argue

188 The Eþistle to the ROlna12s

a fortz'ort" 1 from the influence of Adam to the
influence of Christ-[ a fortz.ort", because, though
God has been, so to speak, constrained to
punish us, His whole desire is to do us good;
and the method of diffusion which He has
allo,ved to operate for evil, we can be much
more sure He \vill set to work for good] 2. We
see the trespass of the one generating universal
death, and we are sure that the counter in-
fluence of Christ is as universally diffusive and
incomparably more powerful. We see the one
man's offence appealing to God for judgement
and producing a condemned race; but we see,
on the other hand, a multitude of sins appealing
to the divine compassion to let loose the free
gift which shall make for acquittal. If the con-
sequence of the transgression was inevitable,
and a reign of death followed, so much more
certainly must the divine gift, abundant as it
is, bring about the triumph of eternal life. If
the one fault diffused itself in universal con-
demnation, so the one act which meets the
divine approval must diffuse itself to produce

1 An a fortiori argument means an argument with a 'still more'
in it :-If something is so then still more something else.

The words in brackets are the suppressed premiss in the
argument-suppressed, but none the less evident.

The Second A dam

r8g

universally an accepted life. One disobedience
made the whole race sinners: one obedience
shall make the whole race righteous. The law
came in parenthetically to the world of sin and
death to let actual sin, like Adam's, have its full
and fatal scope. But the greatness of the sin
only magnifies still more the greatness of the
remedy which divine goodness supplies, that
the sovereignty of sin in a world of death might
be swallowed up in the sovereignty of divine
goodwill working through righteousness unto
life eternal through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the
world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto
all men, for that all sinned: -for until the law sin was
in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no
law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses,
even over them that had not sinned after the likeness of
Adam's transgression, who is a figure of him that was to
come. But not as the trespass, so also is the free gift.
For if by the trespass of the one the many died, much
more did the grace of God, and the gift by the grace of
the one man, Jesus Christ, abound unto the many. And
not as through one that sinned, so is the gift: for the
judgement came of one unto condemnation, but the free
gift came of many trespasses unto justification. For if,
by the trespass of the one, death reigned through the
one; much more shall they that receive the abundance
of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life
through the one, even Jesus Christ. So then as through
one trespass tile judgement caIne unto all n1en to condem-

190 The Eþlstle to the R0111ans

nation; even so through one act of righteousness the free
gift came unto all men to justification of life. For as
through the one man's disobedience the many were made
sinners, even so through the obedience of the one shall
the many be made righteous. And the law came in
beside, that the trespass might abound; but where sin
abounded, grace did abound more exceedingly: that, as
sin reigned in death, even so might grace reign through
righteousness unto eternal life through Jesus Christ our
Lord.

I. St. Paul in this section, as also in part in
his speech at Athens, teaches, as matter which
can be assumed and need not be emphasized,
that God made 'of one' (Adam) I every nation
of men 1 '; that Adam, by actual transgression
of a divine commandment, introduced sin, and
\vith sin death ,vhich is its punishment, into the
world of man; and that as a result all men
sinned. This universal sin he would, no doubt-
as in chapter i, so here-ascribe in part to men's
own wills. In this very chapter he asserts that
what finally' abounded' was actual 'transgres-
sion' like Adam's 2. But this is not the \vhole
account of the matter. Prior to all question
of actual sins; prior to all question of kno,v-
ledge or consequent responsibility, death was
universal, and death marked the inward reign

1 Acts xviI. 26.

2 vcr. :20.

Tile Second Adanl 19 1

of sin. Men in the mass were, through Adam's
sin, constituted sinners 1.
St. Paul then, assuming here as elsewhere 2
the narrative of Gen. iii as true in substance if
not in form, teaches (1) the unity of our race as
derived from Adam; (2) the original transgression
of Adam, as being partly the example of subse-
quent sins and partly the source of a moral cor-
ruption, which since his fall has been inherent in
our race independently of any actual sins; and
(3) the introduction of death z.nto the human race
as the punishment of sin.
On the other hand, the common idea of an
imputation of Adam's guilt to his descendants
he expressly does not teach. Sin is not im-
puted or reckoned as guilt to the individual
apart from the knowledge necessary to con-
stitute responsibility 3. It is extraordinary how
the idea of imputed guz.lt can have come to
be ascribed to St. Paul when he expressly
guards against it. What the descendants of
Adam inherit is an actual inherent weakness
or sinfulness. Again, St. Paul does not attempt
to analyze the actual sin of the world so as to
discriminate between the factors of inherited

1 ver. 13, 14, 19. 2 2 Cor. xi. 3; 1 Tim. ii. 13-15.
S Rom. iv. 15; v. 13.

192 Tile Eþlstle to tIle R0l1ia1iS

,veakness on the one hand and reiterated acts of
rebellion on the other; but he recognizes both.
His language indeed here, and in chapter vii,
would be satisfied by a very moderate doctrine
of the effects of original sin, that is, of the
transmitted effect of sin, considered apart from
its repetition. There is no warrant whatever in
51. Paul for the idea that one man's sin resulted
in the total depravity of human nature. Once
more he is content, as usual, to teach generally
and without exactness. Thus he does not con-
sider the exceptions to the universal law of
death recorded in the Old Testament-Enoch
and Elijah-though he, no doubt, recognized
them. That in spite of these exceptions he still
states the law with such universality: 'Death
reigned from Adam to Moses even over them
that had not sinned 1 , is a warning not to under-
stand St. Paul's universal propositions with an
exactness only applicable to those of a schoolman
or a modern man of science.
2. So much for the substance of St. Paul's
teaching; and now ,vhat is to be said as to its
sources? 51. Paul states his doctrine of original
sin as if it were a commonplace which he could

1 Much more (the argument implies) after the law had been
given and sin could be 'imputed' as sin again.

The Second A dam

193

assume and argue from. N ow the Book of
Genesis certainly spoke of a primaeval disobedi-
ence in our first parents, and of the infliction on
them, as a penalty for their disobedience, of
conditions of strife and pain and death. But the
idea of the transmission of sÙifullless does not
seem to be suggested. Moreover, this narrative
made remarkably little impression on the Old
Testament literature as a \vhole 1. The doctrine,
however, of the introduction of death through
the temptation and sin of Adam and Eve is
found again in the apocryphal literature: thus,
'God created man for incorruption, . . . but by
the envy of the devil death entered into the
\vorld 2.' C FrOlTI a woman was the beginning
of sin; and because of her \\Te all die 3.' C Unto
Adam thou gavest thy one commandment, which
he transgressed, and ilnmediately thou appoint-
edst death for him and in his generations; and
there \vere born of him nations and tribes, peoples

1 The references in Hos. vi. 7, Isa. xliii. 27, Job xxxi. 33, are
not certainly, or even probably, to Adam. There is an obscure
but interesting reference in Ezek. xxviii. J 4-16, in which 'the
fall' seems to be treated as representative of Tyre's fall, and pre-
sumably therefore of all situations in which divine gifts and
vocations arc squandered and lost.

\Visd. ii. 23, 24; cf. Rom. v. 12.
S Ecclus. xxv. 24. The first clause need not mean more than
, she was the first to sin.'

I.

o

LIBRARY ST. MARY'S COLLEGE

194 The Epls/Ie lO the ROl1zans

and kindreds, out of number 1.' 'Adam sinned,
and death was decreed against those who should
be born 2.' This was also the prevalent doctrine
of the Rabbis represented in the Talmud. The
idea of an inheritance of 1110ral corruption-but
not specially associated with Adam's fall-may be
found in the cry of the Psalmist, 'In sin hath
my mother conceived me !' perhaps also in other
passages of the Old Testament, and in our Lord's
teaching, as recorded both by the Synoptists and
in S1. John's Gospel 3 ; but as connected with
Adam's sin it does not, 50 far as can be ascer-
tained, appear for certain in Jewish literature till
we get to the Second Book of Esdras, a Jewish
Apocalypse later than St. Paul. There it is
taught that there was originally a seed of evil,
, a wicked heart,' in Adam as he was created, side
by side with the good in him, and that he by his
sin gave it preponderance in the race 4_ a form
of teaching not by any means identical with 51.
Paul's. On the ,vhole, then, it remains a matter
of some doubt ,vhat exactly was the source

1 2 Esdras iii. 7.

Aþoc. Baruch xxiii. 4, and elsewhere. In parts of this book
the penalty of Adam's sin is regarded as being not death, but
premature death: see live IS, lvi. 6, and Mr. Charles' notes.
3 See Matt. vii. I I ; John ii. 25; iii. 3, &c.
4 2 Esdras iii. 21, 22; iv. 30; vii. 48.

Tlze Second A da1n

195

\vhence St. Paul got the certainty and complete-
ness of his doctrine of' the fault and corruption
of the nature of every man that naturally is
ingendered of the offspring of Adam.'
3. The more important question for us, how-
ever, is not whence St. Paul derived the materials
for his teaching, but whether it is true-whether
it can hold in the light of modern anthropology.
And to this question only a partial answer-the
answer that appears to be most necessary-will
be attempted here 1.
Weare in our generation rightly anxious if
we are asked to accept any professedly historical
statement for which we feel the evidence is
dou btful. We kno\v that from the point of view
of history the origin of our human species
is lost in dense obscurity and uncertainty. And
it relieves many consciences to realize that, if
St. Paul states his argument in a form which
implies the historical character of the narrative
in Genesis iii, all that is necessary for his argu-
ment is to assume (1) that the human race is
organically one, and can be dealt \vith as one;
(2) that sin is universal in our race; (3) that at
least the sting or curse or bondage of death is
due to sin. If we realize that this is all that

1 The matter is to be dealt with more at length in app. note E.
02

196 The Eþzs/le to the Ron1ans

need be a-llo\ved in order to give us full fellow-
ship in St. Palll's religious teaching, \ve shall
be able to investigate the further truth of his
teaching, from a scientific and historical point
of view, \vith a free mind.
And the three propositions stated above are
not reasonably open to doubt. (I) That our race
is one species, and derived from one source, is
the conclusion of the modern ethnologist as
much as of St. Paull. The general theory of
evolution has effectively counteracted the pre-
vious tendency to postulate the existence of
various independent races of men.
(2) There are many professors of psychology
\vho deny the existence of moral freedom and
consequently of sin in St. Paul's sense at all.
As I have already pointed out, this is the real
battle-ground bet\veen theology and science.
But granted the reality of moral freedom and of

1 See E. B. Tylor in Enc)'cl. Brit. ii, s. V. ANTHROPOLOGY, p. 114 :
'The polygenist view (i. e. the doctrine of a plurality of origins)
tiH a few years since was gaining ground. Two modern views,
however (i. e. the belief in the antiquity of man and the develop-
ment of species" have tended to restore, though under a new
aspect, the doctrine of a single human stock.' Ci:. Darwin, Descent
of .Alan (2nd ed.), p. 176: 'Those naturalists who admit the
prin.ciple of evolution. . . will feel no doubt that all the races of
men are descended from a single primitive stock: See also
Keane in app. note E.

The Second A dam

197

sin, i.e. of something \vhich need not and ought
not to have been committed, it is impossible to
deny that, belo\v the innumerable sins of which
human history is full, there exists deep in our
nature an I ineradicable taint '-a morbid tendency
to do wrong-a bias or propensity to evil-which
is the heritage of our race; \vhich indeed men
may become unconscious of by acquiescing in sin,
but of which they become painfully conscious
again as soon as they are awakened to a moral
ideal. The late Dr. Mozley collected a remark.
able series of passages from ,vhat he calls
'\vorldly philosophers and poets' - notably
Byron and Shelley-testifying to the belief in
universal sin 1. This of course we may say is
only the inheritance of animal tendencies from
an animal ancestry; but if so, it is exactly ,vhat
our higher spiritual nature might and ought to
have subdued long ago and brought into subjec-
tion. Its presence with us and in us no\v is
the result of sins innumerable-innumerable \viI-
ful preferences of the lower to the higher nature,
which have let it loose and given it force. It is,
in the strictest sense, the inheritance of sin in
the race.
(3) The N e\v Testan1ent frequently reiterates
1 Mozley's Lectures and Theo/. Paþers (Longmans), pp. 157 ff.

198 The Epls/le to the R0112ans

the assertion that Christ has robbed death of its
sting or delivered men from its bondage. And
this is also expressed (both by St. Paul and by
our Lord Himself, as reported by St. John) by
saying that Christ has' abolished death l' or that
the believer shall never die 2. But if Christ has
abolished death, then there is at least a certain
sense in which sin has been the cause of death.
The essence of death, according to this use of
the \vord, lies not in the physical transition from
one state of existence to another, which is no
more death than it is birth. Death means de-
struction, ruin and collapse. And what is called
death-the death of the present body-has only
gathered about it such terrible associations
because men have become corrupt, and godless
and therefore short-sighted in their estimate of
life. In the moral sense then in which Christ
abolished death, sin certainly introduced it for
man.
N o,v there is, I think, reason to believe more
exactly ,vith St. Paul than is involved in these
three positions 3. But I feel sure that anyone
\vho accepts these three positions-no one of
which any believer in God and n10rality can v.rell

1 !OJ Tim. i. 10.

John vi. 50; viii. 51.
S See app. note E.

The Second A dam 199

reject-may find himself in complete practical
fellowship with St. Paul's religious thought and
with the whole argument of this epistle.
Humanity, in spite of all its racial differences,
is a great unity: it is, if not' of one' individual,
yet I of one blood,' and it is as a \vhole infected
with sin; this is in effect the doctrine of the
'old Adam.' And because it is one, and uni-
versally tainted, therefore Christ can deal with
it as one, in order to accomplish its restora-
tion. And all St. Paul's argument holds good.
God has made humanity one, and so one that
\vhat each does tends to affect all. Thus it has
come about that the force of sin-the wilful
refusal of the higher life and choice of the
lower-has passed in its effects into the moral
fibre of our race, and weakened and corrupted
the whole. God tolerates this, for man must
be, and must be dealt with as being, one and
free. But God desires the well-being of man.
He hates sin. It has all but baffled His pur-
pose for man. Therefore, if He has tolerated the
use which sin has made of the organic unity of
the human race, He can much more be trusted
to use that same unity for the purpose of good.
As man is one in sin, so ,ve can be one in
righteousness: as the old Adam has been

200 Tlze Epistle to tIle R0111ans

universal, so can the new. As sin has been
propagated physically, so Christ can spiritually
propagate the ne,v manhood. The forces of
recovery shall spread and permeate more radi-
cally than the forces of evil, and shall finally
triumph.
Of course, in vie\v of all the deep racial
differences bet\veen, for instance, Europeans,
Chinamen, and the races of India, to believe in
the unity of humanity in any real sense at all
is a great act of faith. But it is an act of faith
in which science encourages us, and not least
the comparative study of religions. Our reli-
gious instincts and faculties are found in very
different degrees of development, but they are
fundamentally the same. And it is an act of
faith to which Christ and Christianity funda-
mentally commit us, though it is probably true
to say that since N e\v Testament times the
brotherhood of men has been practically found
to be the most difficult of Christian dogmas.
4. It is not inopportune, in view of recent
controversy, to call attention in this connexion
to the fact that St. Paul's doctrine of Christ
as the second Adam of necessity involves in
some form His miraculous birth. St. Paul
indeed says nothing about Christ's nativity of

Tlze Second A da11z 201

the Virgin as an event in history; but he con-
ceives of the Christ as a fresh start in manhood,
a new man, who yet drew the substance of His
manhood from the old stock, for He was' born
of a ,voman,' and' of the seed of David.' There
is thus physical continuity between the old
Adam and Christ, and yet, from the moral point
of vie\v, the break is complete. The inheritance
of sin which has followed, and must according to
natural law follow, physical descent, is quite cut
off. Christ is man of our old substance and yet
new man, wholly free from any taint of sin. This
involves a new creative act upon the manhood
of Christ in its source. It involves something
strictly miraculous conditioning the continuity
of His descent from David. There is continuity,
and yet a break in continuity. And this is
exactly \vhat the strongly-attested fact of the
Virgin birth-whatever be the physiological
account \vhich is to be given of it-is calculated
to supply. It presents us ,vith a Christ born
of a \voman, of the substance of our nature,
and yet only so constituted by a new creative
act of God.
5. It ,vill of course be noticed that the drift
of St. Paul's argument in this passage is directly
towards universal salvation, for I the many'

202 TIle Epzstle to the Ronzans

means 'the whole mass.' This is the case in
other places where he is considering what ,ve
may call the natural tendency and scope of the
gospel, 'As in Adam all die, even so in Christ
shall all be made alive.' But there are passages
of a different tendency in St. Paul's epistles,
\vhere he is considering the human attitude
towards the purpose of God; and there he
appears to emphasize strongly the power of the
human \vill to refuse the light and turn God's
blessing into a curse. If the 'savour' of the
apostle's preaching is to 'those who are being
saved a savour proceeding from life and tending
to life,' even eternal life, it is for the wilful who
are perishing in their \vilfulness 'a savour as
from death and tending to death': for they
shall 'suffer punishment, even eternal destruc-
tion from the face of the Lord, and from the
glory of his might 1.' What this eternal de-
struction means, and how it is to be harmonized
with the vision of unity, we cannot precisely
tell. VerIly,' \ve know' but 'in part.' But at
least we must recognize that St. Paul asserts
both sides of the picture: and that the ' terror'
and the hope are not dissociable.
6. We must also notice, before we leave the

1 :01 Thess. i. 7-10 i :01 Cor. ii. 16.

TIle Second Adam

20 3

passage, that the application of the word justifi-
cation receives a certain extension. As the
I grace' of God is associated with a 'gift of
righteousness \' that is to say, of real fellowship
in the life of God, so the preliminary' justifica-
tion of sinners,' in which the divine grace first
of all conspicuously shows itself, is to pass into
a 'justification of life' (or' a justification taking
effect in life'); that is to say, the actual life is to
become acceptable. God begins with accepting
sinners and dealing with them as if they were
righteous if only they will believe. But it is in
view of a moral process which is to produce
a ne\v life, and is to end in making acceptable
not themselves only, in spite of their lives, but
their life itself. The object of the justifying
faith is, and must be, as we sa,v, a living person.
It is Christ \vho \vas 'raised again for our justi-
fication.' And the living Christ can be satisfied
,vith nothing short of a living fello\vship bet\veen
us and Himself in His o\vn life and spirit.

1 vcr. 17.

20 4 TIle Eþlstle 10 the Rotnalls

DIVISION III.
3. CHAPTER VI. 1-14.

The Chrisliall life a tz.vÙzg by dyz.ng.
I T has now been made apparent that belief in
Christ introduces a man into a new sphere of
'life in Christ' or 'state of grace '-a state, that
is, in \vhich the divine grace or goodwill is the
atnlosphere and motive force. And just as with
his natural life he inherited all the taint and curse
attaching to sin in the unredeemed manhood, so
now in his ne\v state he receives from Christ all
the bountiful outpouring, not of acquittal only,
but of divine life. What he is called to ,vitness
is the triumph of the divine good\vill over the
old forces and tendencies of sin in himself and
in the ,vorld.
But now a monstrous suggestion presents
itself, akin to that attempt of the J e,v (of which
we heard in chapter iii) to claim exemption from
the divine judgelnent on his own sins on the
ground that Jewish unfaithfulness had but given

Cltr/sf/all life a 11'vÙzg by dying 20 5

God a backgïound upon \vhich to reveal Him-
self and I-lis righteousness more effectively.
St. Paul, we saw, indignantly crushed that at-
tempt to use logic against conscience. No\v,
ho\vever, a similar suggestion makes itself heard,
only from the side not of J e,vish factiousness,
but of Gentile la\vlessness. Would it not give
divine grace a still better opportunity to sho\v
its quality if, no,v that we are Christians, ,ve
go on living our old life of sin? The more
it has got to forgive in us, the more super-
abundant \vill its mercy appear. Shall \ve not
then continue in sin that grace may abound?
\Ve have other reasons, besides this passage,
for believing that St. Paul's teaching about
divine grace and justifying faith not only ad-
mitted of being nlisunderstood, but was mis-
understood, in his o\vn time 1 as at later periods,
in such a ,yay as to cut the roots of moral effort.
, Unlearned and unstable men \vere ,vresting his
\vords to their own destruction.' And to any
la\vless suggestions based upon the misuse of
God's free grace, S1. Paul had already given
the easiest answer when he had laid it do\vn

1 See Gal. v. 13: 'Only use not your freedom for an occasion
of the flesh: Cf. 2 Pet. iii. 16, and the implications of St. James t
Epistle.

206 TIle Epzstle to the R0111ans

as an absolutely universal truth that God ,vill
at last I render to every man according to his
works . . . to them that are factious and obey
not the truth but obey unrighteousness, ,vrath
and indignation, tribulation and anguish, upon
every soul of man that ,vorketh evil'; or when
he had met the developed logic of the self

excusing J e,v \vith the sharp and final rejoinder
-' whose condemnation is just.'
Here ho,vever St. Paul gives not the easiest
answer to the antinomian suggestion, but a deep,
fruitful, and decisive one. He demonstrates the
absolute incompatibility of principle between the
life of sin and the Christian state. By the very
nature of the case no man can belong to both.
As St. John said, I he that is begotten of God'
in the ne\v life in Christ C cannot sin' without
thereby abandoning his new standing-ground.
At the moment when we became Christians by
the act of baptism, \ve said good-bye to the old
life of sin as completely as a dying man says
good-bye to the familiar scenes and passes over
to 'yonder side.' We ,vere admitted by baptism
into Christ Jesus; that is, ,ve \vere admitted
into a certain sort of human life with a certain
law or character. What is then the character
and law of Christ's life? C \Ve believe that

Clzr/stlan life a Iz.vz"1zg by dyÙzg 207

Jesus died and rose again 1.' That is the central
and summary fact about Him. He passed to
life through death. And this physical death of
His on the cross was not merely a fact in
history, it \vas a fact \vith a moral significance 2.
While He had been in this sinful ,vorld of ours
He had borne its sin, but had no part in it. He
\vas in the sinful world, but not of it. He ,vas
to sin and all its motives as one dead. And by
His physical death upon the cross He gave
summary expression to this moral alienation.
He made a final and out,vard breach with sin,
and passed out of its range, for evermore
'separated from sinners.' , He died to sin once
for all.' And the glory of the Father:3 broke
forth from its customary concealment and vindi-
cated the Christ by raising Him from the dead,
because of \vhat His death had morally meant.
Thus the 'likeness,' or moral counterpart, of
Christ's death is to be, like Him, dead to sin.
And if we are not called to be physically cruci-
fied, \ve are called to its moral counterpart. We
must become morally 'of one growth' with

1 I Thess. iv. J 4.
2 The meaning of ver. 4 is interpreted in verso 10, II.
s Ver. 4; cf. John xi. 40. 'The glory of God' is specially
manifest in the rt;surrection of the dead.

208 The Eplstle to the R01naJlS

Christ's death \ like the slip with the tree it is
grafted into. Only so can we share the new
.
life of His resurrection. This is represented
in the very ceremony of our baptism. It ,vas
impressed upon us by all its out,vard symbolism
that to become a Christian \ve must die to the
old life. We were brought to the n1argin of
the water as to a death, and descended, bo\ved
beneath the ,vaves, as into the tomb ,vith Christ:
in order so, and only so, as having died and been
buried, to emerge again into the new life under
the conditions of ,vhich henceforth we are to
conduct ourselves 2. And this new life is not
only an actual present fello\vship in the risen
Christ (ver. 4): it expects to become so (ver. 5)
in a fuller and cOlllpleter nleasure, but always
on the basis of one and the same clear con-
viction, \vhich ,ve may express thus-When
Christ was nailed to the cross, our old sinful
manhood was nailed there ,vith Him, so that
henceforth our animal nature, hitherto the haunt
and stronghold of sin, might be paralyzed and
rendered as powerless as any crucified criminal,
and \ve, set free to become ne\\" men, might no
longer be sin's slaves. That old sinful self of

1 This is the original suggestion of the word' united' in ver. 5.
2 Cf. Co!. ii. 12.

ClzrlstiCl:1Z life a !zvz.ng by dyÙzg 209

ours \vas put to death, and we passed, as ne,v
men, into another life. Henceforth the tyrant
sin has no claim on us, for death closes all
scores and acquits of all claims. I The man
is dead' is a sun1mary and final plea against
all claimants, and that is our plea against the
claim of sin. We have died to it once and
for all. Therefore, and only therefore, we can
hope to share the deathless glory of Christ's
resurrection. He died once, and passed hence-
forth altogether out of death's control. For the
death that He died \vas to make an end with
sin, and that was done once for all. Henceforth
there is nothing left but life, and that life in the
eternal God. This therefore is the vie\v we are
to take of ourselves as no\v included in Christ:
we are, in regard to sin, dead men who are no
longer responsive to its impulses or alive to its
interests: and therefore, in regard to God, we
are alive in Christ to whom we are united.
And (ver. 12) the practical duty which follows
from this is plain. Christians must not acknow-
ledge a tyrant \vhose strength and power is gone
for ever, by letting sin still reign in the lower part
of their nature-the body still subject to physical
death-and so bring their higher nature into an
unnatural subjection to its appetites: they must
1. p

210 TIle EþIstle to tile R0111GllS

not leave the limbs of their redeemed selves at
the disposal of the dethroned king Sin, to be
used as weapons for the ,varfare of iniquity.
No: they must correspond to the privileges of
the new life in God into \vhich they have passed,
by making an offering of themselves 1 to God,
,vith all the free ,vill which befits those who
were dead and are alive again; and an offering
also of their limbs, no\v restored to their own
control, as weapons for God's ,varfare of
righteousness. Sin shall no longer be their
lord. That despotism belonged to the days
,vhen they were under the la,v. N o\V it is not
the la,v they are under, but the sovereignty of
the divine good\vill.
\Vhat shall we say then? Shall \ve continue in sin,
that grace may abound? God forbid. We who died to
sin, how shall we any longer live therein? Or are ye
ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus
\vere baptized into his death? \Ve \vere buried therefore
\vith him through baptism into death: that like as Christ
was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father,
so \ve also might \valk in newness of life. F or if we have
becolne united with the likeness of his death, we shall be
also with the likeness of his resurrection; knowing this,
that our old man ,vas crucified ,vith flint, that the body of
1 The Greek words represented by 'leave at the disposal of,'
'make an offering to,' are different parts of the same verb. 'The
tense of the former expresses continuance, habit; . . . of the latter,
a single irrevocable act of surrender' tVaughan, Ù-z loc.).

Chris/lCUZ life a Ü.VÙlg by dyÙzg 21 I

sin might be done away, that so we should no longer be
in bondage to sin; for he that hath died is justified from
sin. But if we died 'with Christ, we believe that we shall
also live \vith hinl; kno\ving that Christ being raised
from the dead dieth no more; death no more hath
dominion over him. For the death that he died, he died
unto sin once: but the life that he liveth, he liveth unto
God. Even so reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto
sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus.
Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that
ye should obey the lusts thereof; neither present your
members unto sin as instruments of unrighteousness;
but present yourselves unto God, as alive from the dead,
and your members as instrunlents of righteousness unto
God. For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye
are not under law, but under grace.

I. In the analysis of the passage given above, the
order of the ideas has been somewhat altered,
and their meaning expanded, with the intention
of rendering the real argument more intelligible;
while I believe that no idea is suggested that is
foreign to the original. The passage, however,
is extraordinarily condensed, and is full of some
of the most characteristic of St. Paul's thoughts
-amongst them that of the life in Christ as
being a living by dying, or a life out of death.
It is impossible to try to lead a human life
under any standard that can be called moral with-
out kno,ving that it involves some sor
of i morti-
fication' of selfish and sensual appetites. There
P2

212 The EpIstle to the R0111allS

is that in human nature which, as moralists
generally must recognize and in fact have in
a measure recognized, must be ' done to death.'
I t ,vas this principle that \vas expressed ,vith
such terrible vigour by our Lord when He bade
us pluck out the offending eye and cut off the
offending hand. But the novelty in Christianity
,vas the emphasis ,vhich it laid rather on the
living than on the dying; it was its teaching as
to the infusion into human life of a new and
positive spiritual force, which was to overcome
evil \vith good and s\vallow up death in victory.
It was by their belief in a gift of the Spirit im-
parted to them, and by their resulting power to
think and act freely according to God, that the
Christians were distinguished from the rest of
the world. It is this upon which their apostolic
teachers continually insist. 'I have written unto
you young men, because ye are strong.' , As
many as are lead by the Spirit of God, they are
the sons of God.' It is only as it were in the
second place that it appears that this living
in the new life will involve dying to an old one.
Thus the dying is al\vays made to appear to be
in order to a living. The end is always the life.
· I came that they may have life,' our Lord had
said, , and have it abundantly.'

Chrzslzan life a Zz'vz'llg by dyÙzg 213

The phrases about dying in order to live have
their root in our Lord's teaching, as St. John
represents it \ but belong most characteristically
to St. Paul. The principle which they enforce
belongs only to a fallen world, for it is only the
sin \vithin us and about us that has to be put
to death, or to which we have to die. But it
finds its highest exemplification in the case of
Christ ,vho, sinless Himself, came into a world
of sin and lived under its conditions. Therefore
He had to 'die) to sin and selfishness in the
\vorld in order to Clive) in His o\vn proper life
to God. And this dying to sin-this refusing it
and repudiating it-is summarily represented in
His death upon the cross. The worldly world
killed Him because He would have none of its
selfishness and sin. He, by voluntarily dying
sooner than surrender to the den1ands of this
\vorld, made a final separation of Himself from
sin. Thus He lived His life to God at the cost
of dying. And this la\v of Christ's life is to be
the law of ours. We must die to sin--not on
a visible cross, but by a repudiation of it as
thorough and real: nor to sin outside us only,
but to sin in ourselves. It is only to express
this attitude to\vard sin in ourselves in other

1 John xii. 24, 25.

214 TIle Eplstle to the R01JlanS

\vords, to say that we have to mortify and crucify
our o\vn carnal and selfish selves.
And just as Christ summed up His attitude
to\yards the \vorld by His death upon the cross,
so the Christian's attitude to the ,vorld \vas
summed up in his baptism. At that moment he
died to the \vorld of sin 1. This state of dead-
ness to sin has to be constantly rene\ved, or
again and again recovered. But it ,vas in that
sacramental moment realized in principle and
symbolically represented. The convert who
\vas immersed beneath the baptismal \vaters
and emerged again, realized easily that this 'bath
of regeneration' ,vas, \vhat the early Christians
called it, 'his grave and his mother.' All the
circumstances of his baptism forced it upon him
that he had passed out of an old life into a new
- that he died to one state of things and came
to life in another. The Christians of St. Paul's
churches, like ne\vly-made Christians in Central
Africa or India to-day, were very often highly
imperfect; but they knew-they could not but
kno\v-that they had passed under a ne\v
allegiance; that like the just-converted Frankish

1 It is one gain of the R.V. that for I ye are dead'
Col. iii. 3,
ii.
o), , we are dead' (Rom. vi. 2, 8), &c., we read 'ye died: I we
died,' i. e. at the definite moment of bé.lptis31

Chrlstl.an life a Iz'vÙzg by dyz.llg 215

idolater, they must' burn \vhat they had adored,
and adore \vhat they had burned 1.'
We in our generation, and in d. country \vhere
Christianity has become traditional, realize this
much less easily. It is not only that ,ve have, in
our Church and country, almost ,vholly lost the
sYlnbolism ,vhich belongs to baptism by immer-
sion 2; though that is as great a loss as any sym-
bolic action, not necessary to the administration
of a sacrament, can be. It is not only that \ve
are as a general rule baptized in infancy, for that
under right conditions 3 embodies a fundamental
Christian principle and COlnes do\vn from the
origin of Christianity. It is much more that
Christianity has been allowed to become con-
ventional and cheap. It requires no effort or
moral courage to o\vn, in a formal sense, the
name of Christ. The result is that masses of

1 Gregory of Tours, Hist. Franc. ii. 31: 'To whom (Chlovis)
as he enters the font to be baptized, the holy man of God
(Remigius) thus eloquently spoke-" Meekly bow thy neck,
Sigambrian : adore what thou hast burnt; burn what thou hast
adored." ,
:: Baptism by' affusion' began within the first century, but as
the exception, not the rule. See app. note F.
3 By infant baptism under right conditions, I mean the bap-
tism of infants when there is some real security provided, through
their parents or proper sponsors, for their Christian education,
according to the intention of the Church. On the primitive
origin of infant baptism, see Ephesians, pp. 230, 231.

216 The Epls/le to the R01Jzans

men belong to the Church who are in practice
living purely,vorldly lives, and that the Church
and the world are fused together. Hence it fol-
10,vs again that what the majority of Christians
do is supposed to represent a tolerable manner
of life for an ordinary Christian, who does not
profess to be better than his neighbours. Under
these circumstances there is nothing which is
more important than to reassert the law of life
through death as the only Christian Jaw of living.
The · old man' is as vigorous as ever. The
\vorld is still gratifying its sensual appetites and
grasping after ,vealth without regard to the law
of God. Malice, jealousy, and hatred are alive
and flourishing. God is still being ignored, re-
fused, blasphemed. That is to say, the ,vorld of
sin is still what it always was. It is still under
the same unchangeable ,vrath of God; and still
therefore to live to God is only possible for one
\vho will, and that deliberately and persistently,
die to the world. The renunciation must be
conscious and deliberate. The mortification
and crucifixion of the · old man' and 'the body
of sin' must be painful, at times even agonizing.
A reasonable Christian \vill be indeed surprised
if something painful is not being continually
required of him. And a reasonable Christian

C/1Ylstzan life a llOving by dying 217

rejoices to purchase, even by great sacrifices,
the pearl of great price, which is fellowship
with Christ :-' that he may know him and the
power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of
his sufferings, being made conformable unto his
death.' This is the point. It is not enough for
us to be baptized. Our baptism is evacuated of
all meaning unless we are also' being converted,'
or ' turning' from the world to God; unless we
are turning our back upon its lawless lusts,
its worldly ambitions, its graspings after money,
its refusals of pain, its selfish and unloving life.
Nay: all this renunciation was already involved
in the Name spoken over us at òur baptism.
The Christian name pledges us to the Christian
law of living by dying, progress by conversion.
You cannot refuse the dying without repudiat-
ing the Name. ' Die and re-exist,' said Goethe,
, for so long as this is not accomplished thou art
but a troubled guest upon an earth of gloom 1.'
, Reckon ye, therefore, yourselves to be dead
unto sin.' This phrase, addressed to common
Christians, supplies a magnificent instance of St.
Paul's idealism, that is to say, of his love of con-
I 'Stirb und werde !
Denn so lang du das nicht hast,
Bist du nur ein trüber Gast
Auf der dunkeln Erde ' (quoted by M. Arnold).

218 Tlte Epistle to tIle Ronzalls

sidering things, and his desire that others should
consider things, in the light of their central and
dominant idea o
principle-as they ought to be
rather than as they are. This is his continual
practice: to idealize not in the sense of thinking
unreally of things, but in the sense of thinking
of them in the light of that which is most
fundalllental in them. It is in this \vay that
he thinks of I the world,' or godless human
society, and seelns to represent it as worse
than it sometimes appears, because its govern-
ing principle is radically evil. It is in this
\vay that he thinks of the Church, and speaks
of it in terms of glory not justified by the facts
silnply as they appear; because it has that at
,vork within it \vhich is capable of transforming
it until it not only is, but looks like, the body
of Christ, or the city of God. This idealizing
method is naturally distasteful to English com-
mon sense in most departInents of thinking,
and perhaps particularly in the region of re-
ligion. But we suffer from an over-close adhesion
to the 'matters of fact' or 'the things which
do appear.' We do not think of our life, our-
selves, our church according to the divine
principle \vhich they embody, or 'according to
the pattern sho\vn to us in the mount.' Thus

Clzrzs!zrl1l life a IzVÙlg by d)JÙlg 2I9

\ve are never uplifted, enlarged, ennobled by
the vision of

. . . The gleam,
The light that never was on sea or land.
That light never \vas or is manifest on the sur-
face of actual experience, and yet it is ahvays .
latent-the touch of glory in common things,
the radiance in even our dim \vorld, 'the master
light of all our seeing.' We have almost all of
us got to learn the practical power of the Chris-
tian imagination, disciplined and spiritually en-
lightened, to enrich and ennoble actual life. The
objects which our imagination should reflect
are realities, but realities not yet developed.
\Vhat our imagination should do for us is to
teach us to see things not as they are, but as
they are coming to be.
2. C Life in Christ Jesus,' 'Christ living in
me '-there can be no question that these beau

tiful phrases which, if St. John's witness be true,
represent the teaching of Christ Himselft, ex-
press also \vhat is most central in St. Paul's idea
of Christianity. It \vas the great merit of Matthew
Arnold's St. Paul and Protestani1s1JZ 2 that it re-

1 John vi. 53-58; xiv. 19, 20; xv. 1-10; xvii. 21- 2 3.
\I P. 8r (2nd ed.): 'The three essential terms of Pauline theo-
logy are not, therefore, as popular theology makes them-calling,
jU5tificatÙm, sanctification: they are rather thesc-c(ril'lg with Christ,

220 The Epistle to tile R01JZanS

called the fact to notice in ordinary educated
circles. Recent scientific study of St. Paul has
gone in the sàme direction. The doctrines of
atonement and justification are essential to
St. Paul's theology, but not central: the doctrine
of life in Christ, spiritual and moral identification
\vith Christ, is both essential and central. The
n1aintenance of this life of union is again, as
lVlatthe\v Arnold teaches us, -the final and
Inost developed function of faith-' that Christ
Inay d\vell in our hearts by faith'; for faith is,
or grows to be, such devotion to Christ's person
as desires to lose itself and its selfish aims
in Him and His work. But Matthew Arnold
strangely leaves out of sight the two-sidedness
of this relation: we abide in Christ by faith,

resurrcction from thl dead, gl"OW;,tg into Christ.' Cf. p. 76: 'How
did Paul's faith, working through love, help him [to control
appetite and self-will] 1 It enabled him to reinforce duty by
affection. In the central need of his nature, the desire to govern
these motives of unrighteousness, it enabled him to say: Die /0
them! Christ did. If any man be in Christ, said St. Paul-that is,
if any man identifies himself with Christ by attachment, so that
he enters into His feelings and lives with His life-he is a new
creature; he can do, and does, what Christ did.' It would be
truer, surely, to say in the first of these two passages not 'the
three essential,' &c., but' the three celltral.' Nothing can be more
truly essential to Pauline theology than the terms, calling, justifi-
cation, atonement; but the two last of them at least do not belong
to the central region of religion, but have to do with the removal
cf preliminary obstacles to our entrance upon it.

Chrzstzan life a Izvz1zg hy dyz'Jlg 221

because Christ first of all abides in us by His
loving-kindness and grace. It is His love, always
beÍorehand with us-not merely to forgive us
our sins, but to pour itself out in the com-
municated Spirit-that takes us up within the
circle of His own life; it is the act of God
incorporating us into Christ which evokes and
makes possible the response of our faith to
realize His indwelling and make the adhesion
mutual. God's gift is prior to our response and
the ground of it; and moreover God's gift is
permanent and abiding. It would indeed be
a thought of despair if the bond between Christ
and us depended upon the continuous energy
of our faith to maintain it. Nay, it is always
there-unintermittent through all our broken
efforts and vicissitudes of will-always there for
us to recur to. We are to reckon ourselves
I dead to sin and alive to righteousness,' because
and only because we are also to reckon our-
selves I in Christ.' That is our permanent state,
and it is the function of faith not to create, but
to realize it.
It is St. Paul's clear and vivid perception of
a divine gift given, a relationship to God estab-
lished by God's act, not ours, and that at a par-
ticular time, \vhich is closely connected with his

222 The Eplstle to the R01nans

sacramental teaching. If a divine gift is to be
given (1) definite at a definite time, (2) to men of
.
body as well as spirit in a world not only spiritual
but material, (3) publicly as to members of
a social organization-it is most natural that the
gift should be embodied in an outward rite and
outward vehicle. So St. Paul appears to think.
There is no shrinking about his sacramental
language. It can be said with justice that certain
forms of sacerdotal or ecclesiastical government
\vhich have appeared in Church history would
to his mind have savoured, or more than
savoured, of bondage to men and bondage to
the C beggarly rudiments' of ceremonial obser-
vances. St. Paul is very jealous of maintaining
what \ve may call spiritual individuality and
personal liberty. But there is no justification
to be found in St. Paul's epistles for saying
that he connects sacramentalism-i. e. the idea
of necessary spiritual gifts divinely promised
on the occasion, and through the medium, of
certain outward religious rites of a commu,:
nity-\vith that 'bondage' to 'beggarly rudi-
ments' of which he has so great a dread.
St. Paul's language does not admit of our
supposing that he knew of any other way of
admission' into Christ' except through the gate

Clzristian life a /z'ving by dying 223

of baptism, or any other means of communion
in Christ's body and blood except' the breaking
of the bread.'
3. It will be necessary before we leave this
great passage to give some special attention to
three phrases.
, Christ was raz'sed from the dead by the glory of
the Father.' In the New Testament the sacrifice
of Christ, the atonement won by Christ, is con-
tinually ascribed to the Father, acting through
and in the Son-' God was in Christ reconciling
the \vorld unto himself.' So also the resurreo..
tion is uniformly ascribed to the Father's power
acting in the case of the Son 1. Our current
Christian language has in both cases departed
too widely from apostolic practice. The doc..
trine of the Holy Trinity \vould be more intel-
ligently held, and the worship of the Church
more normally offered in the Spirit through the
Son to the Father, if we had not fallen into
the habit of so speaking of the action of the Son
in dying and rising as habitually to leave out of
sight the truth that His action, as Son, is and

1 The apparent exception is John x. 18; but even there the
word rendered 'take' would perhaps be better rendered 're-
ceive.' Christ had the right to lay down His own life and the
right to receive it again from the Father. So Hort, First Ep.
of Peter, pp. 34, 84.

224 The Epls/le to tile ROl1zans

must always be the Father's action through
Him; and that reversely our worship of the
Son must ahvays be really, and ought to be
in our habitual consciousness, the worship of
the Father through Him.
, Our old 1Jlan was crucified with him.' As
Shelley said that, when Adonais died, "tis
death is dead, not he,' so in an infinitely deeper
sense S1. Paul says that what was killed upon the
cross was (he .does not say' instead of Christ,'
but' \vith Christ ') sin and the' old man.' The
'old man' means the old way of living, or
rather the old way of living considered as
having been appropriated by the sinful indivi-
dual and thus made his own self. Thus it
was the old self that was put to death on the
cross, and a new self came to life, which was
the same in unchanged personality and yet so
practically different in all its relationships, that
it could assert and claim exemptions from the
obligations contracted by the 'old man.'
, That the body of sz.n 1night he done away.' The
identification of sin with the individual had been
specially \vith his body. His bodily appetites
and impulses and parts had been so used to the
ways of sin as to become a 'body of sin,' and
this, St. Paul says, has to be 'done away' or

Chrzstzan life a lz.ving by dyÙzg 225

annulled. It is not that we are to harm the
body itself: for the body itself is good, and is to
be offered, \vith all its members, to become the
weapon of Christian \varfare. There is indeed
no material thing as such that is evil. The
'body of sin' means exactly 'the body con-
sidered as having become the receptacle of sin':
as when our Lord speaks of the I mammon of
unrighteousness I,' He means money ,vhich has
become the instrument of unrighteousness, but
which the children of light are to convert to
profitable uses. 'To annul the body of sin'
means, therefore, almost the same as 'to annul
sin in the body' and leave the body free; but
it emphasizes the fact that sin has got such
hold of the body that to annul sin involves
annulling the body: as St. Paul says elsewhere,
'I buffet' (or' distress ') 'my body and bring it
into bondage 2.'

1 Luke xvi. 9.

2 I Cor. ix.. 27.

I.

Q

226 The EPistle to the R011zails

..

DIVISION III.
4. CHAPTER VI. 15- 2 3.

The perfect freedom ,:s God' s ser
'z'ce.

THE reiterated mention of the deliverance of
the Christian from the yoke of the law-' Ye are
not under law, but under grace '-brings up the
excuse for licentious living in a new form:-
I This very abolition of the strict power of the
law in favour of a system of which the ruling
principle is God's goodness, at least makes one
willing to contemplate any particular act of
sin 1, with a good hope of escaping punishment.'
St. Paul meets the suggestion with a C God
forbid,' and then gives a deep reason for re-
pudiating it, a reason however which is but
a version of our Lord's saying, C Everyone that
committeth sin is the slave of sin 2.' Every man
is always acting under obedience. What he

1 The tense of the verb in 'shall we sin' appears to indicate an
act, not a habit of sin.
2 John viii. 34.

The pet/eet freedom zs God-'s serVlce 227

does in a particular case represents an act of
obedience to some master; that is to say, a
taking service with him. Moreover it appears
on reflection that it must be with one of two
masters and cannot be with both, for' no man can
serve t\VO masters.' It is either with sin, whose
service ends in spiritual as well as physical
death, or with Him to whom obedience is pro-
perly due, whose service ends in righteousness.
What gives St. Paul reason for thankfulness
in thinking of the conversion of the Christians
at Rome, is not that those who became
Christians became thereby exempt from obe-
dience, but that they changed their allegiance
from sin to Christ. At their conversion they
gladly submitted to a pattern or standard of
teaching-the teaching of Christ-to which they
\vere handed over for the fashioning of their lives
-that is to say, they were made free from sin
only to become slaves to righteousness. He
uses the word slavery because so long as their
weak flesh shrinks from divine obedience, they
must recognize that the life which is really
liberty must be accepted even as a bondage, till
it cease to seem so. In óld days they offered
their limbs as slaves to uncleanness and la\v-
lessness, and the result was a lawless life.
Q2

228 TIle Eþls/le to the RONzaus

N ow they must yield their limbs as slaves to
righteousness with a view to a consecrated
.
life. And the change of allegiance is surely
matter for congratulation. They can recall the
days when they \vere free from the service
of righteousness, as being slaves of sin, and
they can remember what fruit they enjoyed
as the result of experiences which they no\v
blush to bring to mind. Of such experiences
death, moral no less than physical, is the result.
Now, set free from sin's slavery and made
God's slaves, they enjoy the present fruit of
consecration to God and the ultimate prospect
of eternal life. So long as Sin was their master
he would pay them their wages, and the wages
which Sin pays is always death. But now that
they are surrendered into God's hands, and
simply dependent on His loving-kindness, there
is no question of wages, but the gift of His
bounty is eternal life, in Him whose life in-
cludes their own, Jesus Christ their Lord.

What then? shall we sin, because we are not under
law, but under grace? God forbid. Know ye not, that
to whom ye present yourselves as servants unto obedi-
ence, his servants ye are whom ye obey; whether of sin
unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But
thanks be to God, that, \vhereas ye were servants of sin,
ye became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching

The pet/ect freedo1Jz ZS God
s servz'ce 229

whereunto ye were delivered; and being made free from
sin, ye became servants of righteousness. I speak after
the manner of men because of the infirmity of your flesh:
for as ye presented your members as servants to un-
cleanness and to iniquity unto iniquity, even so now
present your members as servants to righteousness unto
sanctification. For when ye were servants of sin, ye
\vere free in regard of righteousness. What fruit then
had ye at that time in the things whereof ye are now
ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now
being made free from sin, and become servants to God,
ye have your fruit unto sanctification, and the end eternal
life. For the wages of sin is death; but the free gift of
God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

I. St. Paul is here expounding the real mean-
ing of human liberty. It is generally regarded
as the power' to do as one pleases' or a state of
independence. But such a state does not exist.
There is indeed such a thing as the absence of
external control up to a certain point. That is
an element of liberty, but it reaches but a little
way. The true liberty is the power to realize
one's nature and make the best of oneself-the
power to be what one ought to be or is meant
to be. The instinct of language, as applied to
man, recognizes this. When we see a drunkard,
we recognize a man the balance of whose nature
is upset. The higher part of his nature is being
dragged at the chariot-wheels of his lower. So,

23 0 The Epistle to the Romans

be he never so free a citizen, we call him a
slave-a slave
f drink. On the same principle
we speak of the slaves of lust or the slaves of
money or the slaves of fashion or the slaves
of popularity. By these phrases we describe
various moral states in which some external or
purely animal force dominates a man, and he
loses his self-control, and his whole nature be-
comes disordered. The true order of human
nature is that a man's body should be controlled
by his will. Then he is self-determined. His
whole life is the expression of a rational prin-
ciple. He makes the best of himself. He is
free to be a real man, according to the proper
idea of manhood.
But how can this be? Can this reason or
rational will in man stand and work of itself?
Is it so constructed as to be independent? No.
Just as truly as a man's bodily forces are drawn
from sources outside himself, so his spiritual
being depends on sources and motives beyond
himself.
What does man's' freedom of will' consist of?
Speaking exactly, it consists of a power to dz.rect
a certain amøunt of physical force which passes
into one's bodily frame, and to let it go out in
one or another form of action, deed or word or

The perfect freedom lS God
s service 23 1

thought, more or less moral or immoral, spiritual
or carnal. And this liberty of direction, when
more closely examined, is found to consist in
a power which the will has to choose between
motives which present themselves as ideas to
the mind and to hand itself over to one or the
other. Some of these motives are derived from
physical or worldly appetites; some are derived
through the conscience or faculty of spiritual
apprehension. I
in cases where the lower
motives conflict with the higher, a man still
yields himself to the latter, his life is spiritual;
and it is so because it is determined by motives
and reinforced by influences which come from
beyond himself, and are in fact the motives and
forces of the Spirit of God. But in neither case
is he independent and free from obedience.
He stands at a meeting-point of the spiritual and
material world, and must be governed by one or
the other
In either case man's life is played
upon and dominated by motive-forces, infinitely
vaster and mightier than himself. Let him try
(as he has tried) to forget his necessary depen

dence-to detach himself from the higher obedi-
ence and to 'be as God,' independent-and he
falls necessarily under the dominion of the lower
forces, ofhi.s flesh or of the world. Ifhe is to cease

232 TIle Epz"stle to the ROl1ZallS

to live below himself, he must consent to sur-
render to what is above himself. He must yield
his spirit to the divine Spirit, which is its natural
master. So he ceases to be carnal, or governed
by the flesh, and becomes spiritual, or governed
by the divine Spirit. And that is liberty.
'That man,' said Leo the Great, 'has true peace
and liberty \vhose flesh is controlled by the
judgement of his mind, as his mind is directed
by the government of God 1.' God's service,
and that only, is perfect freedom.
Man then is so constructed that he can only
cease to fall below himself by being raised above
himself. His life cannot fail to be stamped with
the impress of sin unless it is stamped with the
impress of God. The state of the Christian,
surrendered to the fashioning of God, is that
true dependence \vhich is the true liberty. In-
dependent of God, man stands at last over against
God to get ,vhat his independent action has
merited; and that is penal death, the inevitable
outcome of misused faculties, enslaved to sin.
Surrendered to God in faith, on the other hand,
he receives into his nature, through all its open
portals, the inflooding tide of divine love; and
enters, enriched and uplifted, into the life that

1 Scrm. xxxix. 2.

The pet/ect freedo1Jz ,is God's service 233

is eternal, the life which he shares with Jesus,
the life that is truly human and really divine.
I t is of great practical importance that we
should get a just idea of what our freedom
consists in. There are men who, under the
impulse of a purely materialist science, declare
the sense of moral freedom to be an illusion.
This is of course a gross error. But what has
largely played into the hands of this error is
the exaggerated idea of human freedom which
is ordinarily current, an idea which can only be
held by ignoring our true and necessary depen-
dence and limitation. I t is this that we need to
have brought home to us. There is an admirable
story among George Crabbe's Tales, called' The
Gentleman Farmer.' The hero starts in life re-
solved that he will not put up with any bondage.
The orthodox clergyman, the orthodox physi-
cian, and orthodox matrimony-all these alike
represent social bondage in different forms, and
he will have none of them. So he starts on
a career of 'unchartered freedom,'

'To prove that he alone was king of Idm.'

And the last scene of all represents him the
weak slave of his mistress, a quack doctor, and
a revivalist-' which things are an allegory.'

234 The Epistle to the RotJla1ZS

2. The phrase 'a form' or 'pattern of teach-
ing,' is interesting. It suggests the idea of the
"
Church as holding a 'pattern of sound words 1,'
a definite body of instruction, which is to form
the life of each person who gives himself over
to her loving discipline. Christian faith is not
a formless impulse; it is self-surrender to a
corporate life ruled on a definite model of
religious and moral teaching. What St. Paul
has here chiefly in mind is moral teaching.
But the moral teaching was inseparable from
religious facts and motives. N or is it difficult
to ascertain from the allusions of the New
Testament \vhat the subjects were in which
the first Christians ,vere orally instructed, or,
in other words, what constituted 'the tradition'
which lies behind the written books of the New
Testament. It comprised instruction in (1) the
facts of our Lord's life, death, and resurrec-
tion 2 ; (2) the meaning of sacred rites-baptism,
laying on of hands, eucharist 3-including the
Lord's Prayer 4; (3) the moral duties of 'the
way,' and the doctrine 'of the resurrection of

1 2 Tim. i. 13.
2 cr. Luke i. 1-4; I Cor. xi. 23; xv. 3, 4.
8 cr. Rom. vi. 3; Heb. vi. 1-6; I Cor. x. 15, 16; xi. 23 fr. ;
Acts ii. 38.
f Didaché, B; cf. below, p. 293.

The pet/eel freedom tS GodJs service 235

the dead and of eternal judgement 1'; (4) the
meaning of 'the Name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost 2.' On all these
subjects the books of the New Testament do
not give the primary instruction, but imply that
it has been already given.
3. The word rendered I sanctification' (vers.
19, 22) is one which needs to have its primitive
force restored to it 3. The' saint' is the person
set apart for the worship and service of God.
What is here translated 'sanctification' means
literally (I) 'the process of being made fit for
such worship and service,' that is, consecration
as of a priest; or (2) by a slight transition of
meaning, the result of such consecration, i. e.
, holiness.'

1 Heb. vi. I, 2; I Thess. iv. I, 2; v. 2.
2 See Hort, First Ep. of Peter, p. 18, for the fact that 'a recog.
nized belief or idea (of the threefold Name] seems to be every-
where presupposed.'
& cr. above, pp. 31, 32.

23 6 Tile EPistle to tile ROI1ZallS

DIVISION III.
S. CHAPTER VII. 1-6.

F reedo1Jz front the law hy union with Christ.

ST. PAUL is full of t\VO thoughts. The first
is that of life out of death, living by dying. He
had lived an old life in which 'those multitudi-
nous motions of appetite and self-will which
reason and conscience disapproved, reason and
conscience could yet not govern, and had to yield
to them. This, as we shall see, is what drove
Paul ahnost to despair 1.' He had passed to
a new life in which he found in actual, blessed
experience that he could do the thing that he
would. He could do all things-through Christ
that strengthened him. F or it was Christ who
had been the means of transferring him from
the old life to the new, and that by His o\vn
way of dying to live. Christ Himself had lived
I by the Spirit' deliberately and always. He

1 Matthew Arnold, St. Paul and Protestantism, p. 76.

Freedo111 by unzon wZlh Chrzst 237

had never failed morally to do the thing that
He would. But so violent was the antagonism
between His life of divine obedience (with the
claims that it involved upon other men) and
the sinful, wilful, weak world around, that the
world could not tolerate His presence in it;
and it came to this-that He could only live
by the Spirit at the cost of dying to the world,
i. e. choosing to be put to death sooner than
give up obedience to His Father. He chose
to die, and thus dying He lived through death
in the life of the Spirit, and was raised again
from death in body also. N ow Christ had
brought S1. Paul-as He would bring all men
-into union with His new life, and by the same
method. St. Paul had had to die to the sinful
world in order to live to God. But he, being
not only a Inan but a sinner, was obliged not
only, like Christ, to die to sin in the world-he
had also to die to sin in himself. In other
words, he had to 'crucify his flesh with its
affections and lusts '-that is, I his old man' or
old way of living. He had, by the help of
Christ's Spirit, to assert his inner self or person-
ality against a false self-a false \vay of life-
which had appropriated him and held him
captive. Only by being emancipated from the

238 The Eþistle to tlze Romans

C old man) could he come to live 'in Christ.'
It is this transference from the 'old man,' or
old way of life, to the new, by means of a death
that St. Paul here describes under the figure
of a second marriage. The man's true self
\vas as a wife married to 'the old man.' The
old man ,vas nailed to Christ's cross (vi. 6)-
that is, the old \vay of life was put an end to,
even \vith violence. Thus the wife, the human
personality, is, according to the law of marriage,
free to contract a second union with Christ, the
second Man. This is one of the main thoughts
in St. Paul's mind.
But it is entangled with a second. The
'old man' was closely associated with' the law)
-the law which had awakened it out of its life
of moral apathy by its stern reminders of the
will of God. The law had reminded, instructed,
enlightened; but it could not give the inward
power needed to obey its requirements. It
served but to bring to light the tyranny of sin
which made man incapable of yielding obedience
to the will of God; it even augmented its power
by stimulating it to opposition. The law there-
fore belonged purely and simply to the old
condition of moral impotence-the life I in the
flesh' and not 'in the Spirit.' It fulfilled the

Freedonz by union wz
h Chrzst 239

only function it could fulfil in awaking the con-
sciousness of sin. Thus to pass from 'the life
of the flesh' to 'the life in the Spirit' was to
pass out of its dominion. This is the other
thought with which St. Paul is occupied in
the passage we are just going to read. This
too he expresses with the help of the figure
of death. Human law only regards a living
man. Death acquits him from law by taking
him out of the region where it applies. There-
fore, when a man dies with Christ to the' old
man,' he passes out of the reach of the law
which threatened the old man but had no function
beyond that.
Each of these two thoughts is quite distinct
and clear; but they are fused in the present
passage. St. Paul begins with the second, to
show that the 'dead' Christian is free from
the law (ver. I; cf. vi. 7). But marriage law is
taken as an example of law, and by this link we
pass from the second thought to the first. But
the second thought requires the man's self
to die with Christ to escape from the region
of law. The first thought, on the other hand,
requires the 'old man,' or old mode of life,
to die, to leave the man's real self free to be
married to Christ; and this change of subject

240 The Eþzstle to tIle ROl1zans

introduces confusion into the passage. The
attempts to show that there is no confusion
are not successful. In ver. I the idea plainly
is that the self dies, as in vi. 7. In ver. 4
the main idea plainly is that the 'old man'
is dead, and has left the self free to contract
a ne,v marriage. But the other idea is still
sufficiently dominant to cause St. Paul to say
I ye died to the la\v,' instead of I your old man
was crucified.' Morally, of course, the t\VO
phrases mean the same thing; and one who, like
St. Paul, is dz.ctatÙzg a letter, is specially liable
to verbal confusions even when his thought
is clear.
After these explanations the analysis shall
be made as brief as possible. St. Paul, having,
in the latter part of the sixth chapter, shown
that the abolition of the power of the law is
no excuse for sin, recurs to and develops the
principles which he has no\v guarded from
abuse, viz. that the power of the law is past
for the Christian. He is writing, he says,
to men, whether themselves Jews or not,
who understand what law means, and that its
dominion over a man ends with his death.
It has no jurisdiction beyond the grave. He
takes the marriage law (' the law of' or I con-

Freedoffl by unzon wlïh Christ 241

cerning the husband,' ver. 2) as an illustration.
Without noticing the exceptions in the way
of possibilities of divorce which the Jewish law
admitted, he lays it down generally that 'the
law of the husband' binds the wife till death,
but death dissolves its power. When her
husband is dead she is 'discharged' and free
to be married again. (H ere we have passed
from the idea of a man escaping by death out
of the dominion of law to that of his death
dissolving the force of law in the interests
of another, viz. his wife.) That is the state
of the Christian's real self. Christ's body,
St. Paul says, \vas nailed to the cross, and
you were put to death there with Him; or
rather, your 'old man' was put to death there,
and you were left, like wives discharged from
the marriage law by the intervention of death,
free to be united to the risen Christ, and to
see fruits of your new union such as God can
approve. There were fruits from the former
union with the 'old man,' in the days when
you were still under the power of the flesh.
The body was subject to feelings and emotions
which, under the provocation of the law, became
the instruments of sin; and these all at work in
our limbs {constituting the ( old man,' and having
I. R

242 The Eþls/le to the R01nans

ourselves for the subject-wife) brought forth the
fruits of actions fit only for a kingdom of death.
.
But now we are discharged from the law, like
the wife whose husband is dead, having died
to that in which we were held captive, and
come to life in a new region; so that we can be
slaves-that, as we have seen in the last chapter,
we must always be, so far as yielding a complete
obedience is concerned-only no longer under
the old bondage of a written law, but in the
ne\v freedom of the empowering Spirit.

Or are ye ignorant, brethren (for I speak to men that
know the la\v), how that the la\v hath dominion over
a man for so long time as he liveth? For the woman
that hath a husband is bound by law to the husband while
he liveth; but if the husband die, she is discharged from
the law of the husband. So then if, while the husband
liveth, she be joined to another man, she shall be called
an adulteress: but if the husband die, she is free from
the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she be joined
to another man. Wherefore, my brethren, ye also were
made dead to the law through the body of Christ; that
ye should be joined to another, even to him who was
raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit unto
God. For when we \vere in the flesh, the sinful passions,
\vhich were through the law, wrought in our members to
bring forth fruit unto death. But now we have been dis-
charged from the law, having died to that wherein we
were holden; so that we serve in newness of the spirit,
and not in oldness of the Jetter.

Freedom by unzon wz
1z Clzrzst 243

I. If we ask ourselves \vhat is practically
meant by St. Paul's idea of the marriage of the
redeemed soul to Christ, which supplements
his thought of the whole Church as the bride of
Christ 1, the ans\ver seems to be that it is made
up of a moral and a theological factor. The moral
factor is the idea of the devotion of the believer
to Christ-' as a young man marrieth a virgin.'
The theological idea is that of the risen Christ
making the soul of the believer fruitful in good
works by infusing into it His own Spirit or life.
2. The conception of the freedom of the re-
deemed from the moral and ceremonial law is
very easily realized by reference to our ideas
of civic freedom in connexion with the criminal
law. The criminal law exists, and the policemen
are among its administrative officers, but the
respectable citizen is free in his relation to the
criminal law, and passes the policeman without
any sense of alarm-not because he is at liberty
to break the law, but because he has become
accustomed to a way of living with which the
agents of the law are not called upon to inter-
fere. It is in a sense like this that St. Paul
conceives the Christians to have escaped from
the bondage of the Mosaic law.

1 Eph. V. 22.
R2

244 Tile Eþzstle to the Romans

3. What is the meaning of the common
phrase our 'passions' ? It refers to those
feelings ,vhich we experience without any action
of our ,vill. It may be a mere neutral sensa-
tion of smell. I t may be a feeling of hunger,
thirst, desire, anger. These are our' passions'
as opposed to our actions. These appeal to
the will as motives, and it appertains to the will
to determine whether it will yield to them and
so translate passions into voluntary actions.
When the will is weak, and passion is allowed
to pass into action uncontrolled, the man be-
comes the slave of sin, and his passions, in
themselves innocent or only constituting the
material of temptation, become the 'sinful pas-
sions' of \vhich St. Paul speaks in this place.

Functzon and fazlure of the law 245

DIVISION III.
6. CHAPTER VII. 7-25.

The juncft:on and fat1ure of the law.

THE somewhat confused passage just dealt
with, in which several moral ideas and metaphors
are struggling for the mastery, is followed by
a famous passage of luminous power in which
St. Paul expounds, with a profound insight into
human nature, the function and failure of law.
The close alliance into which St. Paul con-
stantly puts I the law' with the reign of sin,
an alliance hardly suggested by any other New
Testament teacher, suggests inevitably the idea
that St. Paul, like the later Gnostics, regarded
the law itself as ( sin,' that is. as owing its origin
to th e power of evil and working for its ends.
Such an idea he of course repudiates. But
all the same it is law, written or proclaimed,
and law only, which both awakens the sense
of sin in man and stin1ulates sin itself to put

246 Tlze Eþlstle to the ROl1zans

forth its power. Let me take myself, we may
imagine St. Paul as saying (for the ' I' of this
passage is very far from being strictly auto-
biographical), as representing man in his moral
history. I was alive apart from any law once.
That is to say, I lived as suited me best, accord-
ing to nlY instincts, asking no moral questions
and troubled by no scruples. And all this time
sin, considered as a moral tyrant, was as if dead.
I had no defined moral ideal and consequently
no struggle and no failure. Then comes the
law \vith its 'Thou shalt not covet ' (or do this or
that). It imposes limits in the name of God on
my life of instinct. It cries 'Hands off!' At
once I find opposition bet,veen me and the law.
I do covet this and that which the law says
I must not have. I find myself in the eye of
the moral law a transgressor. And there is
something more than my own lawless desire in
opposition to the law. I become conscious of
a great power of sin at work in the world and
in me-something greater than mysel
which
intervenes in the struggle and reinforces the
opposition to the law. The tyrant Sin rouses
himself on the pretext afforded by the hostile
cOlnmandment, and exercises his power both
by stimulating my desires, like Eve's (ver. 8), and

Function and fazlure of the law 247

deceiving my intelligence, like hers, to believe
that good is evil (ver. II), and so brings me
by means of the commandment into a state of
flat disobedience to the law, which is death.
For the law was given for life-' This do, and
thou shalt live'; but there is the necessary
converse-' This transgress, and thou shalt die'
(vers. 7-1 I).
The law then, it is quite plain, is the ex-
pression of the will of God. And the particular
commandment is holy and righteous and good.
Is the good then my poison? No. But what
has happened is this-the expression of the
good in the law has brought the tyranny of sin
out into the light. It had me in its power be.
fore, but I did not know it and I did not
struggle. But as soon as the law aroused in me
the beginning of moral consciousness, sin used
the comnlandment as its knife to kill me; and so
showed its hideous character-which indeed it
was the divine intention to uncloak by means of
the law (12-13).
For this it is that we must recognize as the true
state of the case. On the one hand a spiritual
la\v proclaimed over me. On the other hand
a man who in virtue of my fleshly nature have
been sold to be a slave of sin, and who as a slave

LIBRARY ST.I"iARY'S COLLEGE

248 The Eþzs/le to the ROl1zans

find myself doing acts by force of circumstances,
the true nature of which I do not understand,
and which, so far from choosing, I hate (vers. 14,
IS). For I am not only of this fleshly nature;
I have also a conscience \vhich responds to the
claim of the la\v and recognizes it as right. But
my wish to obey the la\v is not strong enough
to carry my flesh \vith it. Thus my actual prac-
tice is in flat contradiction to the ideal of my
choice. But henceforth my will is on the side
of the law, and myself is in my willI. What runs
so uncontrollably to evil is, it appears, not my-
self at all, but the alien tyranny of sin which
has taken possession of me and made my flesh
its haunt and instrument-the haunt and instru-
ment of evil only and not of good. So I can
only wish good and practise evil, and become
more and more conscious that I am not my
own master. The law of God, accepted by
my will, becomes the law of my mind or inner
being; but when I seek to impose it on my
limbs and act accordingly, I find another law-
the la\v of the tyrant Sin-holding sway in
my lo\ver nature; my authority is defied and

J 'I ,vas myself in both [flesh and spirit], but more myseJf in
what I approved than in what I disapproved.'-Augustine, Con-
fessions, viii. 5.

Functzon and faz'lure of the law 249

I myself am dragged in humiliating captivity
to sin in my lower nature (vers. 16-23). My body
has become the death of my spirit. It is my
prison-house. I cry out in my misery for de-
liverance. And it is this deliverance which
I praise God for having given me through
Jesus Christ our Lord. (By union with Him
my higher self is reinforced, and I can control
my lower nature and become my own master.)
But in my isolated, unassisted self, the best that
I can get to is a flat contradiction between the
service of the law of God in my mind and the
service of sin in my flesh (vers. 24, 25).

What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid.
Howbeit, I had not known sin, except through the law:
for I had not known coveting, except the law had said,
Thou shalt not covet: but sin, finding occasion, wrought
in me through the commandment all manner of coveting:
for apart from the law sin is dead. And I was alive apart
from the law once: but when the commandment came,
sin revived, and I died; and the commandment, which
was unto life, this I found to be unto death: for sin, finding
occasion, through the commandment beguiled me, and
through it slew me. So that the law is holy, and the
commandment holy, and righteous, and good. Did then
that which is good become death unto me? God forbid.
But sin, that it might be shewn to be sin, by working
death to me through that which is good ;-that through
the commandrnent sin might beconle exceeding sinful.
For we know that the law is spiritual: but I aln carnal,

25 0 The Epistle to the ROl1zans

sold under sin. For that which I do I kno\v not: for not
what I would, that do I practise; but what I hate, that
I do. But if what I would not, that I do, I consent unto
the law that it is good. So now it is no more I that do it,
but sin which dwelleth in me. For I know that in me,
that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing: for to will
is present \vith me, but to do that which is good is not.
For the good which I would I do not: but the evil \vhich
I would not, that I practise. But if what I \vould not,
that I do, it is no more I that do it, but sin which dwelleth
in Ine. I find then the la\v 1, that, to me who would do
good, evil is present. For I delight in the law of God
after the inward man: but I see a different law in my
members, warring against the la\v of my mind, and
bringing me into captivity under the la\v of sin which is
in my members. 0 \vretched man that I am! who shall
deliver me out of the body of this death? I thank God
through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then I myself with
the mind serve the law of God; but with the flesh the
law of sin.

1.
St. Paul, as has been said, is constantly in
his epistles of this period stating briefly or allud-
ing to the failure of ' the lavl' to supply man with
the moral strength needed to live a good life at
peace with God. Thus:' The power of sin is
the law.' 'As many as are of the works of the
law are under a curse.' 'The letter (the writ-
ten law) killeth.' 'Through the law cometh the

1 Rather, as margin, (I find then in regard of the law' : see below,
p. 26 9.

Function and faz"lure of the law 25 1

knowledge of sin.' 'The law worketh wrath.'
( The law came in beside, that the trespass might
abound 1.' The first of these sayings, occurring
as it does altogether out of apparent connexion
with the context, shows us as clearly as anything
could how full of the idea his mind was. But
only here, in this chapter, does he open his heart
to us to show us the experience on which such
a strange and original conclusion was based.
We can imagine a youth of intensely suscep-
tible moral and religious nature like Saul of Tar-
sus passing out of the home of his boyhood into
the school of Gamaliel in Jerusalem. The one
subject of instruction there was 'the law'-
the divine law which was the pride of Israel's
race-in all the grand severity of its moral
requirement and in all the complexity of its
ritual regulations. It was the one topic. And
all about him he saw the Pharisees building up
the fabric of a meritorious life before God out
of their observances. Now, no doubt the most
easily self-satisfied Pharisees made much of the
principle of compensation-that 'obedience to
certain laws' (e. g. the law of the sabbath or 'the
law of fringes ') 'was as good as obedience to the

1 cr. I Cor. xv. 56; Gal. iii. 10; 2 Cor. iii. 6; Rom. iii. 20;
iv. IS; v. 20.

252 The Eþzstle to the Romans

whole 1.' The Pharisee of our Lord's parable who
went up to the temple to pray, satisfied himself
because he observed certain practices beyond
the requirements of the law. Our Lord bears
witness that the Scribes and Pharisees paid
tithe of mint and anise and cummin-traditional
extensions of the la\v-and omitted the weightier
matters, judgement, mercy, and faith, yet were
righteous in their own eyes. On the other hand,
the maxim of St. James, (Whosoever shall keep
the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he
is become guilty of all,' was a commonplace of
the Jewish schools.
There can be no doubt that it must have
been the severer teaching that fastened upon
young Saul's mind. He acknowledged himself
a 'debtor to keep the whole law 2.' And in
ritual detail, though no doubt the effort required
was immense, he managed to be 'blameless 3.'
But in the weightier and deeper matters it was not
so. The moral law, enforced and commented
upon, continually confronting him with its 'Thou
shalt not,' brought to light in him the fact of sin
- in desire, we should gather, rather than in act
or word. The law said' Thou shalt not covet' (or

1 See J. B. Mayor in The Epistle of St. James (ii. 10), p. 86.
2 Gal. v. 3. 3 Phil. iii. 6.

Functzon and fazlure of the law 253

lust). And Saul said, ' But I do lust after this and
that and the other. My heart and my desires
are not in harmony \vith the law. Nay, the very
fact that the law prohibits it seems to make my
,vrong desire stronger.' So the whole Pharisaic
idea of a moral life-the standing over against
God and building up a fabric of merits-seemed
to be unsatisfactory. The fabric in his own case
was full of internal rottenness. It would not bear
severe examinatIon. Moreover he could not
but observe the lives of those around him who
were so well satisfied with their moral edifices,
and he recognized that their satisfaction was due
to nothing but hypocrisy or shallowness. As
he went later to Jewish settlements in various
centres, he saw always the picture of a life fair in
its own eyes and rotten in fact. His general ex-
perience of Jewish life is summed up strongly
enough in the second chapter of this epistle.
Thus he drew the conclusion that the law could
not be really kept-it was only possible to keep
it by means of evasions and compensations
which made it worse than useless.
Meanwhile there was forming itself in Saul's
mind the conviction that the whole attitude of the
Pharisees towards God was false. They lived
as if God had made a contract or covenant with

254 The Eplstle to the R01JZanS

them, and within the terms of this covenant man
could deal \vith God on an independent basis.
God must keep to His covenant and not augment
it or change it. And on their side the people of
God under the covenant had nothing to do but
to keep their part of the bargain and claim their
reward with a conscious and proper pride in
the merits of their race and of themselves. This
,vas exactly the spirit in which they rejected
Jesus as the Christ, as it was also exactly this
spirit \vhich He had chosen for His sternest
denunciations. But all this idea of merits, all
this boasting, must have come to seem to
Saul's mind monstrously untrue to the real
fundamental relation of man to God. For who
maketh thee to differ? and what hast thou, 0
Jew, that thou didst not receive? And if thou
didst receive it, why dost thou boast thyself as
if thou hadst not received it? Thus St. Paul's
training must not only have made him feel that
he could not satisfy himself in keeping the
whole law; but it must also have convinced him
that law itself as a principle, law as understood
and represented among the orthodox Jews, was
fundamentally and permanently incompatible
with the real relation of man to God. There
\vere many elements in the Old Testament,

Functzon and fazlure of the law 255

notably in the Psalms, in which a quite different
relation of man to God was indicated-a rela-
tion of meek trust as of a son to a father, and
of penitence and dependence and peace. But in
the teaching St. Paul had received, the law, the
legal covenant of man and God, which suggested
a quite different moral attitude, was the essential
element; and that, we must suppose, he felt in-
creasingly sure was a foundation on which he
could not stand.
No doubt these deep questionings about the
law, and the growing misery accompanying them,
made him at first all the more zealous for it. No
doubt they explain his fanaticism against the
Christians. No doubt his 'kicking against the
goad' represents the rebellion of his heart
against anything which seemed to threaten the
position of the law of his fathers, and especially
against the utter upheaval of foundations in-
volved in accepting for Christ Him whom the
leaders of his people had rejected and caused
to be crucified. But when he had effected the
great transition, when he had found in Jesus
Christ all that satisfied his deepest instincts
about God and his deepest desires for union with
Him, his old experience of the law took shape
in a profound theory of its place in the divine

256 TIle Epistle to the R01nans

education of the human race. Ultimately man
is meant to be in such close and harmonious
.
relations to the divine Spirit that he should both
know what is right and do it by an inner light
and power. But an outward written law was
a necessary prelude to this; and that in the
main because sin-individual sins and the long
tradition of sin-had hardened men's consciences
and blinded their eyes, and the divine law as
proclaimed through the conscience had become
in consequence either utterly inadequate or had
even been silenced altogether. A \vritten law
therefore, peremptory and explicit, and announc-
ing its sanction in definite penalties, was needed
to teach men anew what God really required. It
was given in such a mode as threw men on their
own independent moral strength, and by that
very fact convinced the best among them of their
inward weakness and sin; while to many more
it appeared rather as involving an impossible
effort-as 'a yoke which neither they nor their
fathers were able to bear.' In either case it was
their 'tutor to bring them to Christ' -with His
teaching of God, not as a taskmaster, but as a
Father, righteous indeed, but still more loving.
And if there were others again, shallow or
worthless men, whom the law simply hardened

FU11ctzo1Z and fazLure of the law 257

in the superficial self-righteousness of mere
'observances,' or the worst sort of religious
hypocrisy, that was only another way of de-
monstrating its inadequacy. It left the world
to choose bet\veen the Pharisees and Christ as
representing real righteousness.
This 'doctrine of the law) involves both its
necessary function and its failure. There can
be indeed to no thoughtful mind any doubt as
to its necéssary function. Conscience, individual
and social, is continually going to sleep. It may
be taken quite for certain that if Christ were
amongst us in manifest power by His Spirit to-
day-as He ought to be in the Church-our
society as a whole would be smitten anew with
a sense of sin, and not least of social sin 1. Our
familiar excuses for our selfish indulgence of
our lusts, for our weak surrenders to passion
and impulse, for our commercial dishonesties, for
our failures to carry righteousness into politics,
for our social injustices, for our selfishness and

1 It is disappointing, I think, that the grave appeal to the Church
as regards social duty, made by the bishops assembled at Lambeth
last year in commending to the notice of us all the report of their
Committee on Industrial Problems, has received such scant atten-
tion, except from a certain group of Churchmen who were already
occupied with the problem. It might have been expected that
this solemn appeal would have vastly widened the area of attention.

I.

s

258 The Epistle to the Ronzans

luxury, for our scamped and half-hearted work
-the familiar pleas of commercial or physical
necessity, or political exigencies, or lack of
knowledge, or absence of responsibility, or the
influence of heredity-,vould dry up anp wither
on our lips under the po,verful glare of the divine
· letter' - Thou shalt, Thou shalt not. God hath
not' given any man license to sin,' He hath given
no man exemption from the trouble or the suffer-
ing or the loss involved in doing right. The
obligation is peremptory to be just, to be merci-
ful, to be honest, to be self-denying, to be pure.
And if we do not care to take the trouble to be
so, the only alternative is to have Christ for our
adversary, and find at last the horrible depth
of meaning \vhich His words contain-' Thus
and thus have ye made void the \vord of God
by your tradition.' 'Inasmuch as ye did it not,
depart, ye cursed, into eternal fire!' · It is
good for thee to enter into the kingdom of God
maimed or halt or with one eye, rather than
having two hands or feet or eyes to be cast into
hell, where their worm dieth not and the fire
is not quenched.' These and the like words
are metaphorical-but metaphors which are in-
tended to teach the heart only the more vividly
because they are metaphorical.

Functton and fatlure of lIte law 259

Indeed, in each age, and therefore in ours,
most fertile of excuses, \ve need the letter to
kill us; the stern, outward, unmistakable an-
nouncement of God's will to assure us that God
does not change with our whims or feelings,
and cannot accoillmodate Himself to immoral
necessities. In each age, and therefore in ours,
most capable of moral self-deception, we need
continual and forcible reminders that a quiet
conscience is no adequate guarantee of agree-
ment with God, unless we have taken pains to
keep our conscience enlightened by meditating
on the divine word.
And if St. Paul's account of the function of
I the law' is true, so also is his account of its
necessary failure. It is obviously true if you
confine I the law' to meaning what in the tradi-
tion of the Pharisees it had come to mean, or
what in his ideal way of thinking 51. Paul defined
it to mean-that is, not the whole Old Testa-
ment with its anticipations in prophecy and
psalm of the temper of sonship and its evan-
gelical forecasts of the new covenant, but bare
precept, expressing externally and unmistakably
the will of God. Mere law, instructing men
truly and searchingly as to God's requirement
in thought as well as word and deed, instructing
S2

260 The Epistle to the R0111ans

men and challenging them, and doing nothing
more, is so manifestly incomplete an expression
.
of God's relation to man, quite apart from all
question of its ritual elements, that it can in the
nature of things serve only a temporary purpose
in the conscience, by leading us to a truer
knowledge of Him who terrifies indeed, but
only in order to reassure, and kills but only in
order to raise to life again.

11.

At this point it is necessary to answer the
t\VO much-disputed questions-and it is possible
to do it briefly-Is St. Paul, in giving this sum-
mary of moral experience, speaking ( of himself
or of some other man'? and-Is the struggle
described in verses 14 -24 to be regarded as
occurring without or within the frontiers of the
regenerate state?
There is no doubt that St. Paul must be in
part really describing an experience through
which he passed. He was really, we may
Imagine, 'alive without the law once' in the
sense that he was brought up a happy Jewish
child, under the law but not deeply feeling the
terror of its claims, until he was growing to\vards

FU1Zctz.on and faz.lure of the law 261

the I independent' period of life and found him-
self confronted with its requirements in detail.
There need be no doubt that he is speaking
of some experience of his own when he alludes,
here as elsewhere, to the deceitfulness of sin;
and when he describes the two stages of moral
progress-the first, in which the conscience of
the man is awakened to recognize that his
habitual practice is not in any full sense con.
trolled by his reason and will; and the second,
in which the will is deliberately enlisted on the
side of good, and the man only made thereby the
more conscious that his will is in no real control
of his actions, but that he is the captive of the
alien power of sin. In some sense, though
51. Paul does not give us the materials for say-
ing exactly in ,vhat sense, he must have passed
through these stages of experience. He must
have really felt himself the slave of sin, though
the sin was of a sort which left him, I as touching
the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.'
He must have felt that he could not do what
he ought; and the bitterness of his persecuting
zeal may have been in part the reflection of this
sense of impotence.
And so far as 5t. Paul is speaking of himself,
there can be no shadow of doubt that the state

262 TIle Epistle to tlze Rotnans

of conflict lay almost wholly outside his conver-
sion and regeneration. It \vas I prevenient grace'
..
-God's dealing \vlth him before he ackno,v-
ledged Christ-that set his \vill so strongly to
desire and approve the right; and his new per..
sonal faith in Jesus, and the might of the Spirit
of Jesus to whom he became united, gave him
the po\ver to do what he had so long and so
ineffectually been willing. This was his experi-
ence, and he bears witness to it. Even though
he \vould have made no claim to sinlessness
after his conversion, yet the sense of sin which
possessed him so strongly, which made him call
himself' not \vorthy to be called an apostle,' 'less
than the least of all saints,' and' chief of sinners,'
,vas in the main a n1emory of \vhat was past.
The present sense \vas the consciousness of
po,ver in Christ. It is inconceivable that St. Paul
should describe himsel
\vhile a Christian, as
'sold under sin.' And it was an idea of human
corruption quite different from St. Paul's which
prevented Augustine and Calvin from recogniz-
ing that either a pious Jew, or a Gentile which
had not the la\v, could be moved by the divine
Spirit to 'rejoice in the la\v of God after the
inner man' (ver. 22), quite independently of any
kno\v ledge of Christ.

FUJlctzolZ and failure of the la'lv 26 3

But if St. PauJ is in a real measure auto-
biographical in this passage, there is no reason-
able doubt that he is not merely so. He has
generalized his experiences to represent the
moral experiences of the race. The' I ' is the
human individual in general. Thus' alive
without the law,' if it can in a certain sense
describe what St. Paul had once been, describes
much better the state of men-Greeks and
Romans, or men all the world over I before the
law came '-who had an easy social standard
and lived natural lives without any troublesome
moral ideals, and were \vholly unvisited by
conscientious scruples or the terrors of the
divine holiness. Upon such men comes the
severer knowledge of the righteousness of God
through the teaching of some prophet or founder
of religion. It may come to men collectively in
a nation or group, and result in some general
movement of conscience. Or it may come to
an individual through some circumstance which
confronts him with a higher moral claim than he
has ever faced before-through the example of
a friend, through a book or a sern10n. To many
in St. Paul's day the synagogues, where I Moses
had in every city them that preached him,' had
been the means of their awakening to the moral

264 Tlze EpIstle to the R01naJlS

claim of God. And whenever men are thus
confronted with the divine law of righteousness,
in a more or less perfect forI11 and with more
or less of in1pressiveness laying its prohibitions
upon them- l Thou shalt not do this or that J_
if they do not harden their hearts to it, they
pass through the stages of experience which
51. Paul has so admirably idealized. There is
that in them which the prohibitions of the divine
la\v stimulates into antagonism. They become
conscious of a po\ver which beguiles or cheats
them into breaking the law; they awake to the
sense of sin and failure to do God's ,vill, and
find that they are not their o,vn masters, but
are drifting under the in1pulse of what is not
themselves. There awakens in them the con-
science and will to approve and choose \vhat is
right, and with that a 'self-contempt bitterer to
drink than blood,' as they realize that though
they approve and choose the right they cannot
do it. Thus the conviction is strengthened that
their true selves are on the side of God and
right, and that \vhich holds them captive is an
alien tyranny which has got its lodgement in
their lo\ver nature.
This is the psychological moment for the
arrival of the gospel. The n1an who simply

Function and fazlure of the law 26 5

desires the right and is paralyzed by his own
impotence to realize it in his own strength, out
of the depth of his despair learns that God is
not a taskmaster and judge, but a Father; that
He is not his adversary, but is on his side;
that if he will simply surrender himself to the
divine love, as it is made evident in Christ, an
his past failures and sins are as if they had
never been, and for the future God will not
teach him from outside and leave him to struggle
alone, but will work in him to will and to do
His good pleasure. Then the sense of moral
impotence may pass into the sense of po,ver
in Christ. And in proportion as any man's
actual life-history, or the history of any group
of men, corresponds to this ideal sketch, the
period of moral struggle and failure may fall in
the main outside the regeneration and new life
in Christ.
But, almost from the beginnings of Chris-
tianity, and increasingly as Christianity has
become popular, men have been 'christened'
in infancy or in mature life without the moral
issue having been defined or the moral will
awakened. An ordinary Englishman, for ex-
ample, is baptized in infancy. This means that
he is actually regenerate and introduced into

266 Tile Epistle to tlze R0111allS

the body of Christ. In rare cases he is so
brought up as to realize this, and corresponds
so \villingl y with the teaching that he lives the
life of the regenerate from the first, and never,
except in a very refined forln, kno\vs the sense
of impotence or passes through the period of
hopeless struggle. He has never found God's
commandments grievous. But in most cases
there is no such pains taken to enlighten the
young conscience, or no such readiness of cor-
respondence. The man lives as his surround-
ings suggest-a decent enough life, very likely,
and nlore or less honourable, but never in face
of the full divine law. And such an one is (alive
,vithout the law.' For him all the experiences
St. Paul describes are stilJ to come, inside the
circle of his actual regeneration. And they
may be very gradual and slow, and 111ay repeat
themselves, more or less, innumerable times.
St. Paul's is an ideal pictuïe; but the intended
issue is always the same. When ,ve find our-
selves saying, (To ,,,,ill is present \vith me,
but to do that which is good is not,' ,ve may
be quite certain that ,ve are not realizing the
power of our new birth. We are as men ,vhom
God has as yet only externally visited. We
are conscious of our own \veakness and of the

Functzon and faz'lure of the law 26 7

strength of evil; but not of the third force,
stronger than either ourselves or the power of
evil, which is at our disposal if we will dra\v
upon it. What is needed is a deliberate and
whole-hearted realization that we are ,in Christ
and Christ is Ù1, us by His Spirit; an unconditional
surrender of faith to Him: a practice, which
grows more natural by exercise, of remember-
ing and deliberately drawing by faith upon His
strength in the moments of temptation and not
merely upon our own resources. 'In the name of
Jesus Christ of Nazareth I \viU do thus and thus.'
So we too may form like St. Paul the habit of
victory. We too 111ay cry in sober earnest' It
is no longer I that live (in my naked self), but
Christ that liveth in 111e.' C I thank God through
Jesus Christ our Lord.'
When that sense of struggle or failure which
St. Paul describes occurs, as is generally the
case with us traditional Christians, in the process
of our a\vakening to the knowledge of the new
birth, \ve may in a sense say that the struggle
is part of the process of regeneration 1; but the
,vord 'regeneration' best describes, not a pro-
cess, but a single divine act upon us and in

1 'Inter regenerandum.' 51. John wi1l not speak of a wIlful
sinner as truly' begotten of God,' I J Oh11 iii. 9; v. 18, &c.

268 The Eþzstle to tIle R011zans

us t, and this single divine act is consistently
identified in the Ne\v Testament with our
baptism, though it is only realized by our moral
conversion ,vhen we awake to claim the privi-
leges of our new life.

111.
There are t\VO smaller points which claim
notice.
Weare reminded by the \vay in which St. Paul
speaks of sin, in this and other passages-as
a force or power greater than the individual
man, \vhich possesses him and dominates him
through his lo\ver nature-and especially by the
consciousness \vhich he betrays of its' beguiling J
power, that he believed in personal agencies of
evil. lOur \vrestling is not against flesh and
blood (merely), but against the principalities,
against the powers, against the world-rulers of
this darkness, against the spiritual hosts of wicked-
ness in the heavenly places 2.' Particularly it is
in the deceitfulness of sin that St. Paul realizes
,vhat one must call the personal character of the
evil po\ver 3. He is profoundly conscious that
1 See Dale, quoted in Ephesians, p. 86. 2 Eph. vi. 12.
s Cf. 2 Thess. ii. 9-1 I : 'The working of Satan with all. . . deceit
ofl1nrighteousness. . . a working of error, that they should believe
a lie.' 2 Cor. xi. 14: 'Satan fashioneth himself into an angel of

Functlon and fal"lure of the law 269

there makes itself heard in temptation a voice as
of a person which lies to us, as it lied to Eve,
as to the true character of the suggested action;
and when we have been deceived and seduced,
and have done the deed, and its real character
has become apparent, I the tempter' turns round
upon us with the grin of unmasked malevolence.
Is there anyone who can really dissociate from
his own spiritual experience this idea of the
tern pter and the deceiver?
We do well to remember in reading this
passage the meaning of the recurring word
C law.' In modern English it has come to mean
the principle or method observable in any-
thing. Such and such a thing, we say, exhibits
such and such a law, i. e. acts constantly in such
and such a way. It is natural therefore for us
to read this meaning into the word in verse 21,
as in the Authorized Version, I I find then a
law, that, when I would do good, evil is present
with me,' Ì. e. I find that this is what constantly
happens. But the Greek word, as used in the
Old and New Testaments, does not bear any
meaning like this 1. It means always the in-
light.' I Tim. ii. 14: 'The woman being beguiled hath fallen into
transgression/ Cf. Heb. iii. 13: 'The deceitfulness of sin.'
1 It never appears to be used, as in classical Greek, for ( custom,
either in LXX or N. T.

270 TIle EPistle to the R0111ans

junction or set of injunctions imposed by a law-
giver. In this passage it is used seven times of
the divine (Mosaic) law. When the will accepts
this la\v and would impose it on the lower
nature, it becomes I the law of the mind,' i. e.
the la,v which the mind enjoins (verse 23).
With this conflicts I the law of sin,' I the dif-
ferent law,' which sin or the evil one would im-
pose and which has gained actual sway I in our
members.' \Ve must then interpret verse 21
in harmony with this use, and taking the
sentence to be a broken one, translate, as the
margin of the Revised Version, ' I find then, in
regard of the law, that, to me who would do
good, evil is present.'

Life In the Spirl
27 1

DIVISION III.
7. CHAPTER VIII. I-II.
Life -in the Sþt.rit.

IF we were to represent the Epistle to the
Romans as a bas relief, there would be two
passages which would have to stand in the
highest relief-the end of the third chapter, in
which St. Paul speaks of that free justification
which is given to all men on the equal basis of
faith in Christ the propitiation for their sins; and
this eighth chapter, in which he speaks of the
triumph \vhich belongs to the life of the justified,
lived in the power of Christ's Spirit.
The note of this chapter is struck in the
words I no condemnation' at the beginning-
· There is therefore now no condemnation to
them that are in Christ Jesus.' St. Paul knew
so well what it was to be conscious of being
under condemnation. He had never been what
we should call a sinner. He had always been
a man who, according to the standards of the

272 The Epistle to tile Romans

Pharisaic righteousness, was pre-eminently right-
eous; he had always been a man who did much
.
for religion. But he had kno\vn, in a form in
\vhich it is known to very few of us, what it
\vas to be conscious of being under God's con-
demnation. God had been to him as a task-
master over against him, breaking in upon his
life with continual and searching warnings as to
the divine requirements, with continual threat-
enings and continual terrors; and he had been
as one standing over against God with the
consciousness that, do as he might, he could
never satisfy, or climb up to the level of, the
requirements of the righteous God. There was
always the haunting sense that he fell short
-always the haunting sense that he was on his
trial, and on that trial was condemned. But
now all had been changed; and that by a pro-
cess \vhich in a certain sense was as simple as
possible, but than which nothing could be more
fundamental and deep. All was changed be-
cause the relation had begun at the other end.
No longer ,vas there a climbing up of man to
God, no longer the effort of a Saul to commend
himself to God. The relationship had begun at
the other end, at God's end. Or rather, what
had begun was the realization on the man's

Life z"n the Sþzrz"t

273

part of the true order. For God had been
beforehand with Saul all along. All the time
that he was striving, working, slaving to com-
mend himself to a God ,vhose righteousness he
could never attain to, God was waiting there
for him to find out his mistake-waiting to re-
veal Himself as no hard taskmaster, but as the
Creator, the Father of his spirit. The process
had now begun anew from the other side. God
had simply of His o\vn pure initiative mani-
fested His love. He had sent His Son out of
His own essential being into this world as it
was, not asking ,vhether it was a fit ,vorld for
the Son to enter into; but taking it simply as
it was, because it appealed to the divine com-
passion by the very multitude of its sins and
the very vastness of its need, God had sent forth
His only begotten Son out of the bosom of His
love and of His pure initiative; had sent Him
to take this nature of ours upon Him, in it to
make atonement for us \vith God, and in it,
raised fron1 death and glorified, to be the source
of a ne,v and spiritual life, such as should
triumph over sin in all who will believe in
Him. That is the great point. It \vas all
purely God's doing: a pure disclosure and act
of God, who showed Himself ready to take
I. T

274 The EPistle to the Ronzans

men as they \vere, to forgive them and entrust
them with the divine Spirit, if they would only
.
trust Him. God is no longer the taskmaster
over against men, ,vith His threats and His
terrors. He is the Father \vho has given His
Son, who has given men a sacrifice \vhereby
He can forgive their sins, and has given them
the Spirit of His Son into their hearts. God
is on their side, and they are on God's side.
That is the great change. And the object of it
all is that what formerly seemed so unattainable
might now be the very thing that proved itself
practicable-to live according to God; that the
requirement of the law might be no longer an
impossible claim over us, terrorizing us with its
perpetual threats, but that by the power of the
new life in which \ve live, I the righteousness of
the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not
after the flesh, but after the spirit.'
The follo\ving is a paraphrase of the passage
we are now to study :-
The result then of all that has been said is
that the divine verdict of guilty, which \vent
forth over men on account of their sins-that
, disclosure of divine wrath J which St. Paul had
so profoundly felt and interpreted-hangs no
longer over those who have passed into the ne,v

Life Ùz the Spirz.t

275

life in Christ Jesus. In the old life, sin with
its attendant death held s,vay over us and gave
the law to our actions. But we were freed from
that despotism in passing under a new and
stronger authority. It is the divine Spirit, by
\vhom ,ve have been brought into the life in
Christ, \vho no\v controls us. Of old the Mosaic
la\v was po,verless to help us. It could inform
us of God's will, but it could not enable our
poor weak human nature to keep His require-
ments. But God has provided an effective
remedy for this state of things. He has sent His
own Son to take our nature upon Him, and
come in among our sinful race without any
apparent difference between us and Him. He
put Him simply among us and in our position,
to be the sacrifice for sin; and thereby did for
us what ,ve had so failed to do for ourselves-
passed effective sentence of condemnation on sin,
and that in our own nature. [Do we ask ho\v
sin was condemned? The answer is, it stood
condemned by the perfect sacrifice of reparation
for sin, which the sinless Man made to the
divine character on our behalf, when at the
requirement of obedience He shed His blood.
I t stood condemned, still more fully, by the fact
that God raised Him from the dead and exalted
T2

276 The Epistle to the R0111.allS

Him far beyond the reach of sin, to the glory
of His right hand, and made Him the head of
a redeemed manhood, and poured forth His
Spirit to be the new life of all that believe in
Him] 1. And the object of this mission of the
Son, and this judgement on sin in H is person,
was the creation of that ne\v humanity to \vhich
we belong, \vhich lives not under the control of
human appetite, but under the control of Spirit:
and because it so lives, in the life of Another,
succeeds in the one point where man had hither-
to failed, in keeping the righteous requirements
of the divine law. Our ne\v way of life, there-
fore, is contrasted ,vith the old in its \vhole
tone. For just as, if we live in fact under the
control of our weak manhood with its \vants
and appetites, our mind and conscious aim is
directed to minister to its purposes, so in the
same way if our life is in fact controlled by
Spirit, our conscious aim also is directed to
spiritual purposes. And the t\VO lives are con-
tr'lsted no less markedly in their prospects.

1 The passage in brackets expands the sense in which St. Paul
conceives the Father to have passed sentence of condemnation on
sin, in the person and through the sacrifice of Christ, in accor-
dance with such passages as vcrs. 21-24 ; iv. 25; Phil. ii. 8-10;
Eph. i. 15 iT.

Life t.n the Spirit

277

The mind controlled by human appetites is
under the doom of death, temporal and eternal.
The mind controlled by the Spirit is in a state
of life, so far as concerns itself, and of peace
towards God. The mind controlled by human
appetites is under the doom of death because it
is at war with God. It does not, it cannot, keep
His commandments. Those therefore who so
live in their own strength merely, cannot please
Him. But that is not now our state. We now
live in the power of Spirit, since the Spirit of
God and Christ-that is, Christ Himself-dwells
in us. To have Him is the very meaning of being
a Christian. Not to have Christ's Spirit, that is
Himsel
dwelling in us, is not to belong to Him.
But if He does dwell in us, then, though the
body must still pay the debt of death, because
of sin to which it has belonged-nay though it
is already as good as dead-yet the Spirit within
us is a superior principle of life, because of the
divine righteousness which it bestows upon us.
And this life shall triumph over death in our
case, as in Christ's. For God, who raised up
Christ from the dead, shall also by the working
of the divine Spirit which dwells in us, give
life again even to our bodies, though now they
are subject to death.

278 The Epistle to the Romans

There is therefore now no condemnation to them that
are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in
Christ J esus mad
me free from the law of sin and of
death. For what the law could not do, in that it was
weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son in the
likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, con-
demned sin in the flesh: that the ordinance of the law
might be fulfilled in us, \vho \valk not after the flesh, but
after the spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind
the things of the flesh; but they that are after the spirit
the things of the spirit. For the mind of the flesh is
death; but the mind of the
pirit is life and peace:
because the mind of the flesh is enmity against God; for
it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it
be: and they that are in the flesh cannot f>lease God.
But yc are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, if so be that
the Spirit of God dwelleth in you. But if any man hath
not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ
is in you, the body" is dead because of sin; but the spirit
is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of him
that raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, he
that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead shall quicken
also your mortal bodies through his Spirit that dwelleth
in you.

I. 51. Paul declares that the Father sent His
o,vn Son to redeem us in 'the likeness of the
flesh of sin.' The word 'likeness' is the saIne
as that used in the similar passage \ \vhere we
are told that the eternal Son in love for us
'emptied Himself' so far as to take the' form.'

I Phil. ii. 7.

Life ,in the Spz.rit

279

or essential characteristics, of our servile human
nature; nor only its essential characteristics, but
also the outward conditions or ' likeness' of com-
mon men as they are. The point is that Christ,
who Himself as man' knew no sin 1,' appeared
amongst us under all the circumstances of sin,
and with no outward or apparent difference
between us and HÜll-' in all points like as we
are' with the single exception of sin in the
will or in the nature.
2. In verse 3 the Authorized Version, and the
margin of the Revised, translating the Greek
literally, give us, 'God sending His own Son
. . . for sin.' But the phrase C for sin' is con-
tinually used in the Greek of the Old Testament
for the sin-offering, and in the N e\v Testament
always has the sacrificial meaning attached to
it 2; and accordingly its meaning here must be
so defined.
3, The flesh of man, considered as a material
thing, is not evil. It was that which the Son
took, and it was' in the flesh' so assulned that
He pronounced sentence on sin-in that very
flesh which was sin's donlain; as, in the Epistle

1 2 Cor. v. 21.
2 See Heb. x. 6, cr. 18, 26; xiii. II; I Pet. iii. 18 i I John
H. 2 j iv. 10.

280 TIle Epistle to tlze ROl1zans

to the Ephesians t, He is said to have' abolished
the enmity in. his flesh.' The flesh as such
then is not evil; but \vhen, as in our fallen
state, the proper order of our complex manhood
has been reversed, and the flesh has become
the predominant partner, having the mastery
of the spirit, then it becomes a 'flesh of sin.'
To live 'in the flesh,' or I according to the flesh,'
is to let the flesh have its way and be the master
instead of the slave. Then the whole life be-
comes carnal-a carrying out I the ,vorks of the
flesh '-and even the rational faculty becomes a
I carnal mind.' What our redemption effects is to
restore the right order and make the flesh again
the instrument of the spirit-of the human spirit,
that is, empo\vered by the divine Spirit, without
\vhich it cannot hold its ground. Then the \vhole
life, \vith an its bodily faculties, becomes spiri-
tual and carries into effect 'the works of the
Spirit. J
In the passage we have been considering, the
Revised Version distinguishes, by the use of
capital letters, between the divine Spirit 2 and
the human 3, or spirit in general; but the fact
that the divine Spirit is what liberates and re-
stores the human spirit is so much in St. Paul's

1 ii. IS.

2 Verses 2, 9, I I.

I Verses 4, S, 6, 9, 10.

Life -in tIle Spirit

281

mind that it seems better to make the primary
reference to the divine Spirit throughout.
It is of the greatest practical moment to grasp
that, to St. Paul, the change in human life
which COlnes about through our conversion and
new birth is a change in order. What was
managed from belo\v is now controlled from
above. That is the point on which we need to
examine ourselves. Where do we begin from?
Are we in the position of men struggling to
manage their o\vn lives, and commend them-
selves according to some standard more or less
right, which either their personal pride or their
social circle or the divine la\v has set up? If
so, God is over against us, our taskmaster, our
adversary, our stern judge, and our life is 'ac-
cording to the flesh.' It is managed from below.
It is ruled on its own level, and it fails. But
there is another life which begins at once from
the thought of God. God has made us, and
therefore He is responsible for us. He has
n1ade n1e because He loves me. Therefore He
is bound to make the best of me. If I will only
put myself into His hands He is pledged, simply
because He created me, therefore to redeem me,
to save me, to glorify me. He takes that re-
sponsibility upon Himself. He has shown His

282 Tlze Eþlstle to tlze R01na1lS

lo
by the sending and the sacrifice of His
Son and by tþe gift of His Spirit. And His
Spirit I have received. At a definite moment
He came upon me. He entered into my life,
as into those first Christians to whom St. Paul
wrote, at baptism and by the laying-on of hands.
This is the fact then. God is on my side. He
makes Himself responsible for my being. If I
will only entrust myself to Him with the cordial
return of trustful love, th en all that He has
ever breathed into my heart of human pos-
sibility He will realize and bring to perfection.
The requirement of the law shall be fulfilled in
us who walk not after the flesh but after the
Spirit.- This is a point of view upon which it
is worth while reflecting deeply, and over and
over again. Unless we ar
continually prac-
tising ourselves in this conception of life, we
find ourselves falling back again into the atti-
tude of one standing over against God with God
for his taskmaster. And that is the false and
always ruinous idea.
We must also take careful note of what
St. Paul means by 'spiritual' and I carnal.'
I Carnal' does not mean made of flesh, and
I spiritual' does not mean immaterial. That is
carnal which is ruled by the flesh, ruled from

Life zn the Spirit

28 3

below. That life is carnal in whi
h our spirit,
meant for God, is dragged at the chariot-wheels
of our lower life; and that is spiritual which is
ruled and mastered by the Spirit. We must not
suppose that we shall make our religion spiritual
by disparaging external acts or bodily exercises
of worship. No; that is spiritual which is
ruled by the Spirit. The worship in 'spirit and
in truth,' for us men who belong to the religion
of the Incarnation, must be a \vorship in body.
But it will be spiritual if it is full of spiritual
intention. Secular business again is spiritual if
it is ruled by the divine Spirit according to the
law of righteousness. Politics are spiritual, com-
mercial and municipal life are ,spiritual, art and
science are spiritual, and everything that de.
velops our faculties is spiritual, if we will allow
the divine Spirit to rule in all according to the
la\v of righteousness, truth, and beauty. For
the whole of our being, with all its sum of
faculties, is made by God and meant for God.
What a mistake it is then, when people speak,
as they so often do, as if sin were really natural,
as if lust and worldliness were natural, and as
if spirituality were something unnatural, belong.
ing to another world. I t is exactly the opposite.
The only natural position for us is when our

28 4 TIle Epistle to the Romans

flesh is ruled by the spirit. It is an unnatural
usurpation ,vùen the spirit is dragged at the
chariot-wheels of the flesh, ,vhen our life is
dominated by lusts or appetites. That is the
very overthro,v of nature. And grace does but
restore to us the true order of our being,
when the flesh and all the faculties of our
body are again controlled by the spirit, so that
our whole being expresses a spiritual purpose
and obeys a spiritual law. The same external
acts are spiritual or carnal, natural or unnaturaJ,
according as they express or do not express the
mind of the Spirit. The same physical facts are
the basis of true married love, and of the wildest
licentiousness. In the latter case they are carnal
because they express no spiritual purpose; in
the other case they are spiritual because, con-
secrated in the family life,. they become the
organ and the vehicle of the divine Spirit. God
will be responsible for our whole life, our
politics, our commerce, our marriage, the work-
ings of our intellect, the \vorkings of our emo-
tions, all the parts of our nature. He will raise
our nature up through death; He will conse-
crate it to life immortal in the divine city; He
will sanctify it here and now: if only, and in all
things, we will believe that He \vho made our

Life in tlze Spz'rlï

28 5

life is capable of making the best of it, and show
ourselves ready to entrust it to His disposal.
4. We must notice what is implied in this pas-
sage about the Holy Trinity. St. Paul speaks 1
of 'the Spirit of God' (the Father), 'the Spirit
of Christ,' I Christ,' and then again, the 'Spirit
of Him that raised up Christ,' as if all these
expressions \vere identical; as elsewhere 2 he
prays that the Father will strengthen men by
His Spirit, in order that Christ may dwell in
their hearts, and they be filled with the fullness
of God. All \vhich language means that where
the Spirit is, Christ is, and where Christ is, God
the Father is. So in St. John, our Lord speaks
of the Holy Spirit as I another' advocate who
is to come I in his name' from the Father; and
yet adds that in the Spirit's coming He Himself
will come; and with Him the Father-' we will
come 3.' The sacred 'persons' are spoken of
as distinct-personally distinct-and yet as so
mutually involved in the action one of another
that the coming of one is the coming of all. So
truly is God one in three. We find something
like this in human personalities under the in-
fluence of love. Each single personality is not

1 Verses 9- II . 2 Eph. iii. 14- 1 9.
3 John xiv. 16, 18, 23, 26.

286 The Eþzstle to the ROl1lans

self-contained and exclusive. Love, to a real
degree, fuses persons; and thus the husband
and wife and child (to take the highest example)
may be said to live and act in one another and
through one another's influence. But this is
only to a limited extent. Weare also mutually
exclusive. Our responsibility and actions re-
main individual and impermeable. What I am
doing, I am doing, and not another. But ,vith God
the mutual interpenetration of Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit, is represented in the inspired lan-
guage as far more complete. The Godhead is
a fello\vship and relationship of perfect love' in
three persons.' But God is not three separate
individuals. vVhat each I person' does the others
do. The action of one involves all. God is in-
separably one in His being and in His action.
If the Father creates, He creates through the
Son and by the Spirit. If the Son redeeills,
the redemption proceeds from the Father and is
effected in the Spirit. If the Spirit sanctifies,
it is from and in the Father and the Son. Thus
\vhen the Spirit came forth at Pentecost out of
the uplifted manhood of the Son to impart to us
all His richness, He came not merely to supply
His absence, but to accomplish His presence.
He makes Christ present \vithin us, and also the

Life z'n the Spirit 287

Father: so that God, three in one, dwells in the
hearts of His people.
5. 'The requirement of the la\v is to be ful-
filled in us.' Do we ask how we are to keep
the whole of that terrible law? I t is by obey-
ing the commandment to love our neighbours
as ourselves, in which the whole law is I briefly
comprehended 1.'
6. If in the last verse of this passage we
read 'through His Spirit,' and not (as the
margin) 'because of His Spirit,' then the Holy
Spirit is expressly spoken of as the agent of our
resurrection and, by implication, of the resurrec-
tion of Christ. And this is the natural function
for the I Giver of Life': indeed 'Spirit' means
nothing else than 'breath' -the 'breath of life
from God 2.'

1 Rom. xiii. 9.

Ezek. xxxvii. 9; Rev. xi. II,

288 Tlze Eþzs/le to lite Ronlans

DIVISION III.
8. CHAPTER VIII. 12-17.
Tlze life of sOllshzp.
WE are now in the Spirit. The divine Spirit
dwells within us, and restores our nature to its
proper balance by giving us control over our
lower nature. The moral meaning and obliga-
tions of such a condition are plain, and St. Paul
proceeds to enforce them. When our impulses
and appetites solicit us to let them have their
own way, ,ve must give them to understand that
they are making a claim ,vhich we cannot
recognize and which, if we did, ,vould lead us
the ,vay of death. On the contrary, it is these
merely physical tendencies-the practices of the
body ,vhen left to itself-that ,ve lTIUst put to
death by the po\ver of the Spirit. And if ,ve
do this ,ye are on the \vay of life. Why so cer-
tainly? Because ,ve are sons of God-nothing
less. Those \vho thus act under the Spirit's
guidance are all of them sons of God.. Further,

The life of sonship 28g

if we ask ourselves what sort of spirit we
received when we became Christians, we know
that it was not a spirit appropriate to slaves
and calculated to bring us again into a con-
dition of terror under a law. It was a spirit
appropriate to those who have been adopted
for sons of God, and it is in the power of that
spirit that we cry out to God by the name
of Abba, Father, in our familiar supplication.
We have thus in our own spirits the sense that
we are sons; and behind that and reinforcing
it, the divine Spirit, by putting the word Father
into our lips, bears the same witness. Well
then, if we are thus children of God, we have
the child's prospect of entering into our inheri-
tance. Christ, our elder brother, has -.lready
entered into it, and we shall enter into it with
Him, if we are content to take the Christian
maxim for true, and suffer with Him on this
side of death, that we may share His glory
beyond.

So then, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to
live after the flesh: for if ye live after the flesh, ye must
die; but if by the spirit ye mortify the deeds of the body,
ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of
God, these are sons of God. For ye received not the
spirit of bondage again unto fear; but ye received the
spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. The
I. U

290 The Eplstle to the R011Zans

Spirit himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are
children of God: and if children, then heirs; heirs of
God, and joint-heirs \vith Christ; if so be that we suffer
with hint, that we may be also glorified with hint.

There are several phrases in this passage
which we shall do ,veIl to notice.
I. If by the sþz.rzï ye 1ltOrtify the deeds of the
body, ye shall lz've. Mortification is absolutely
necessary, and at every stage of the Christian
life. I t is the carrying into effect in detail
of the fundamental law of our new life-the
law which the baptismal ritual was intended
to teach-life by means of death. F or the
body had gained the upper hand: it had come
to control the weakened spirit. Therefore the
reinvigorated spirit must react upon the body
and its impulses. It must make its govern-
ment felt, and the physical tendencies must
be checked, pruned, cut back. This is the
Christian circumcision. And as Christ was first
born, then circumcised the eighth day; so each
new birth in Christ must be followed by a
like circumcision of the luxuriance of animal
appetites. We learn the lesson when we are
children: we expect to be restrained and curbed:
and unle
s we are very foolish we learn the
lesson only more deeply in later life. There

The life of sonshiþ 29 1

is no single faculty or function of our being
which can escape this law. No friendship can
be cemented without mutual self.denial. N e
marriage, however founded on affection, can
be blessed without the mutual pain of self-
repression and concession. No art or science
can be mastered by mere intelligence without
moral discipline. No gift can be consecrated
in its natural luxuriance. 'Every branch in
Christ that beareth fruit, He pruneth it that
it may bring forth more fruit.'
2. As many as are led by the Sþirit of God,
these are S01lS of God. The New Testalnent
language would have us regard all the baptized
as regenerate and sons of God, but it will not
let us mistake the meaning of this teaching.
In any effective sense it is they, and only they,
who are really c01ztrolled by the divine Spirit
who can call themselves sons. As S1. John
says, freedom from sin is the only test of divine
birth 1. And the best way to make our new
birth effective is to meditate on the gift which
we, when we became Christians, did actually
receive. We who, like the first Christians, re-
ceived baptism with the laying-on of hands, did
then and there receive (such is the implication
1 I John iii. 9.
U2

292 TIle Epistle to tIle R01JlanS

of St. Paul's language) 1 a spirit proper not to
s]aves but to sons of God, qualifying us to
call on God as our father, and to co-operate
in the purposes of Hig kingdom. It remains
for us to claim these powers and privileges of
our sonship, and to claim them to the full.
Yet how many anxious-minded Christians of
our day would appear to have received nothing
more nor less than the spirit of slaves! They
realize their religion as a restraint, a respon-
sibility, a cause of fear. And such a servile
religion is no doubt better than a hypocritical
sense of sonship unaccompanied by the fear
of sin. The wise man remarks that I a servant
that dealeth \visely shall have rule over a son
that causeth shame, and shall have part in the
inheritance among the brethren 2.' But the
spirit of the slave is not \vhat we are called to.
If we had more religion, if \ve would give it
freer course, if we would consent to think less
of our circumstances and more of God and His
gifts, there would be less fear and more joy
both in our work and our prayer.
3. A bba, Father. Our Lord, speaking in

1 'Ye received' (at a particular time), not' ye bave received' j
cr. above, p. 214, note I.
, Prov. xvii. 2.

The life of sonshiP 293

Aramaic, the vernacular of Palestine, is recorded
by St. Mark in His hour of agony to have
said Abba. And even in the Greek-speaking
churches of St. Paul's day, that sacred word
was still used side by side with its Greek
equivalent, according to the witness of this
and the parallel passage, Gal. iv. 6. St. Paul
appears to be referring to some occasion on
which the Church was in the habit of calling
on God with the Aramaic and Greek words
side by side, and it is more than likely1 that
he is making a definite reference to the Lord's
Prayer, as recited by the Roman and Galatian
Christians in the form prescribed for us in
St. Luke's version 2, beginning I Father.' The
retention by Greek Christians of an Aramaic
word in a familiar re]igious formula, is like
the later retention by the Latins of the Greek
prayer, Kyrie eleison, or the retention by us of
the names Te Deum, Magnificat, &c. St. Paul's
meaning would come home to us better if we
were to read-' whereby we cry Our Father.'
4. 'The Spirt"t himself beareth witness wt"th our
sþz.rz"t, that we are children of God.' This is a very

I See Chase, Lord's Prayer in the Early Church (' Texts
nd
Studies,' Cambridge), p. 23. Cf. Hort on I Pet. i. 17.
2 .
Xl. 2.

294 TIle Epistle to tIle RotJza11S

important passage for showing that St. Paul did
not in any \vay c.onfuse the divine Spirit and the
human, and that in his belief the divine indwell.
ing did not in any way annihilate the human
personality. Even in the closest union God
remains God and man man. But the passage
is at least as important as opening up a special
avenue of insight into St. Paul's conception of
Christian worship and spiritual life generally.
He speaks first of a witness of the individual
spirits of Christians to the fact of their divine
sonship; and he distinguishes from it something
greater, a witness of the divine Spirit, support.
ing the human. What exactly does he mean by
this \vitness of the divine Spirit as distinct from
the consciousness which - under the leading
of the divine Spirit-Christians are led them-
selves to form? How are we to distinguish
the Spirit's witness from the witness of our own
hearts inspired by Him? Is it merely 1 that the
'consciousness (of the individual) is analyzed,
and its data are referred partly to the man
himself, partly to the Spirit of God moving and
prompting him?' I do not think that a closer
examination will lead us to be satisfied with
this.

1 S. and H., in loco

The life of sonshiþ 295

The witness of the divine Spirit is apparently
fixed by the context to consist in the supply
to us of the phrase' Abba, Father 1 '. It is the
Spirit 'in whom we cry' (or, as the passage in
the Galatians says, 'who Himself comes into our
hearts crying) Abba, Father,' \vho thus, by sug-
gesting this cry to us, bears witness with our
own spirits that we are sons of God. Thus the
supporting witness of the Spirit lies especially
in a certain mode of address to God or formula
of prayer which He supplies. But this' cry' or
prayer the Spirit supplies to the hearts of the
Church as a ,vhole. The whole Church, and
not the individual soul only, is the Spirit's home.
, Know ye not that ye are (corporate1y) a temple
of God, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in you' 2?
The witness of the Spirit is thus a witness
borne in the whole Church, which supports
and sustains the witness of the individual soul.
This is a thought full of consolation. The life
of the individual Christian reposes upon, and is
infolded by, the larger life of the whole body.
Behind his own spiritual consciousness, with all
its vicissitudes, lies the inspired consciousness
of the whole body, the witness of the Spirit;
and this in part expresses itself in inspired

1 cr. Vaughan and Gifford, in loco

2 I Cor. iii. 16.

296 The EPistle to the R01nans

formulas-the Lord's Prayer, the psalms, the
creeds of the divine name, the Church's wor-
ship; and thesè formulas, representing our best
self, are to sustain us in our fluctuations of
feeling, and carry us over our periods of dryness
and insensibility. 'The Spirit Himself beareth
witness with our spirit.'
S. · The inheritance' of the children of God,
which in the Old Testament begins by meaning
the Holy Land, \vas spiritualized into meaning
the kingdom of the Messiah. 'They shall
inherit the land for ever 1 ': 'the meek shall
inherit the earth 2.' And this kingdom of the
Messiah is an eternal kingdom: 'they shall in-
herit eternal life 3 '-that is to be our inheritance
as the chosen people of the Lord. And it is
an inheritance not only incorruptible but in-
exhaustible: all share in it to the full of their
capacities] and the abundance of those who
share diminishes nothing from the richness that
remaIns.
And into that inheritance Christ is 'the way.'
His life sho\vs the law by \vhich it is to be won.
I t was a current Christian saying-' a faithful
saying' -' if we died ,vith Him, we shall also live
with Him; if we endure, \ve shall also reign

1 Isa. Ix. 21.

2 Matt. v. 5.

S Matt. xix.
9.

The life of s011ship 297

with Him 1.' And whenever we are inclined to
complain at anything we may have to suffer,
there is one thought capable at once of quench-
ing all murmuring, because of its indisputable
reasonableness-' It is enough for the disciple
that he be as his l'vlaster.'

1 2 Tim. ii. II.

2g8 TIle EPistle to the R0111ans

DIVISION III.
9. CHAPTER VIII. 18--3 0 .

The hOþe of tile creation.
ST. PAUL has touched upon the familiar topic
of Christian suffering, and he ends his great
argument with a splendid encouragement to
believers to suffer gladly, and that for a manifold
reason. First (18-25), that the suffering is al-
together inconsiderable by comparison with the
glory to which it leads, and is in itself only
a part of the universal travail-pang through
which created nature as a whole is to produce
a glorious new earth to be the habitation of
righteousness. Secondly (26-30), that \ve are
not alone in our sufferings. We have the
support, within us and around us, of the Holy
Spirit as our effective intercessor, and the
consciousness of an eternal and infallible pur-
pose of divine love \vhich is taking effect stage
by stage in the case of each one of us \vhom
God has made members of His elect body.
The following is a paraphrase.

The hope of the creat't"on 299

The sufferings in which this present situation
involves us Christians are quite inconsiderable
by comparison with the heavenly glory which
is destined to be disclosed and to include us.
The sense of this glorious future pervades the
whole creation. Nature is like some on-looker
at a spectacle craning the neck to see what is
coming. She is waiting for the final disclosure
of the children of God in their true position;
knowing that she too-as a new heaven and
a new earth-will share that glorious future.
At present her powers are continually frus-
trated; failure is everywhere; the law of cor-
ruption is upon her like a bondage. This curse
she was subjected to, through no will of her o,vn,
by the simple fiat of her Creator-but not for
ever: she was left to hope for deliverance from
this bondage into a state of freedom-a share,
that is, in the freedom which is to belong to the
final glory of the children of God. With this
in mind we can bear the universal spectacle of
pain. What we have always heard hitherto,
wherever we have lent our ear all through
nature, has been groans; but they are the groans
as of a woman in travail: and in these groans
we, God's chosen people, though we already
possess the first instalment of the divine Spirit,

300 The EPistle to tIle R01nans

the pledge of what is yet to come-in these
groans we bear our part, and also in the hope
that accompanies the groaning. We groan ex-
pecting to realize our sonship, as that can only
be realized when body as ,vell as soul is re-
deemed from all evil. Hope is thus the very
condition on which we received our spiritual
deliverance when we became Christ's. And
hope means nothing else than a condition of
expecting good things not yet in sight. It
means the readiness to endure till they come.
And there is another reason why we should
be glad to bear our present sufferings. It is
because, though we are weak in ourselves, we
are not left alone. Of ourselves we should be
be\vildered and not know even what we ought
to ask God to give us. But we have in the
Spirit ,vho dwells in us a divine advocate and
intercessor. His intercession makes itself per-
ceptible to us in groaning desires after a better
condition, desires ,vhich cannot be put into
,vords, but which are intelligible enough to
God. He who searches the hearts interprets
the longings we cannot express-understands,
that is, the Spirit's meaning; for He is God's
o\vn Spirit, and the intercessions He makes for
us, the consecrated people, express God's own

The hOþe of the creation 301

intention. And what that intention is towards
us we know. We know that it is an intention
of good which cannot fail for those who love
God; or, in other words, for those who are
the subjects of the divine purpose and call-
an intention of good to which everything, even
seeming evils, must minister. For God's pur-
pose reaches from eternity to eternity, and
cannot be baffled from without or fail by the
way. Those whom in eternity He designated
beforehand as instruments of His will, those He
also eternally destined for the highest human
perfection-for the blessed lot of being made
like His own Son, as He should be hereafter
incarnate, so that He might be an elder brother
in a great human family: and those \vho were
thus appointed beforehand for this high destiny,
in due course He called into the elect body.
And those whom He thus called He acquitted
and accepted for righteous: and whom He thus
accepted He crowned with glory.

For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time
are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall
be revealed to us-ward. For the earnest expectation of
the creation waiteth for the revealing of the sons of God.
For the creatiop was subjected to vanity, not of its o\vn
will, but by reason of him who subjected it, in hope that
the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage

302 Tile EPistle to the R0111a1Zs

of corruption into the liberty of the glory of the children
of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth
and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only
so, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the
Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, \vaiting
for our adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. For
by hope were \ve saved: but hope that is seen is not
hope: for \vho hopeth for that which he seeth? But if
we hope for that which we see not, tllen do \ve with
patience \vait for it.
And in like manner the Spirit also helpeth our infirnlity:
for we know not how to pray as we ought; but the Spirit
himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which
cannot be uttered; and he that searcheth the hearts
knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because he
maketh intercession for the saints according to the will oj
God. And we know that to them that love God all things
work together for good, even to them that are called
according to his purpose. For whom he foreknew, he
c:llso foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son,
that he might be the firstborn among many brethren:
and \vhom he foreordained, them he also called: and
\vhom he called, them he also justified: and whom he
justified, them he also glorified.

1.
There are passages in the Ne\v Testament
\vhich are unique. Such is the passage in St.
Peter's epistle about Christ preaching in l-lis
disembodied human spirit to other spirits in
Hades-a passage vaguely suggestive of wide
thoughts and hopes, and leading us to suppose

The hOþe of the creation 3 0 3

that the ideas which it contained were familiar
in the apostolic circle, but standing alone, with
practically nothing to elucidate it from outside.
And the passage just read about the groaning of
creation in travail-pains is unique, not because
there is not a good deal to elucidate it in other
parts of the Bible, but because 51. Paul in his
treatment of common material strikes a note
of sympathy with nature from nature's point of
view, which is heard nowhere else in the Bible.
In Genesis we read that 'the ground was
cursed l' because of man's sin, in the sense ap-
parently that, as the penalty of his sin, nature was
to be made a rougher home for him, and he was to
extract his food from it only with pain and sweat.
Isaiah is perhaps interpreting this primitive
lesson in more modern tones when he cries that
'the earth is polluted under the inhabitants
thereof; becau5e they have transgressed the
laws, changed the ordinance, broken the ever-
lasting covenant. Therefore hath the curse de-
voured the earth, and they that dwell therein
are found guilty: therefore the inhabitants of
the earth are burned, and few men left. The
new wine mourneth, the vine languisheth 2.' In
this sense certainly, if not in some more recondite

1 .., .
111. 17-19, v. 29.

2 .
XXIV. 5-7.

304 The Epistle to tlze ROI11a1Zs

sense also, the ground is stricken with a curse
as a result of human sin. And there are parts
of the world \vhere no lesson seems more patent.
At any rate, whatever be the interpretation given
to it, it was part of the common Jewish teaching
that 'though all things were made very good,
yet when the first man sinned they \vere cor-
rupted, and shall return no more to their proper
state until the son of Pherez 1 shall come 2.' For
the curse was not to be for ever. There was
a good time to come-a new heaven, a new
earth, wherein righteousness should d\vell-' A
restoration of all things,' and not merely of
man 3, \vhich should accompany the coming of
the Messiah. This was a most popular idea in
Jewish hearts. 'I \vill transform the heaven and
make it an eternal blessing and light. And I will
transform the earth and make it a blessing and
cause mine elect ones to dwell upon it: but the
sinners and evil-doers shall not set foot thereon 4:.'
Here then we have the common belief which
St. Paul inherits and uses. He lays indeed
very little stress upon the connexion of the
earth's present condition with human sin, if he
J i. e. Messiah, son of David, son of Pherez (Ruth iv. 18).
2 Bereshith Rabbah, xii. 5.
3 Isa.lxv. 17, lxvi. 22; cr. 2 Pet. iii. 13; Rev. xxi. I; Acts iii. 21
· Book of Enocll, xlv. 4, 5.

Tlte hope of the creal-lOft 3 0 5

even alludes to it. He only says it was' sub-
jected to vanity' by the decree of the Creator,
and that with a glorious prospect. It is upon
the present aspect of the creation and its great
prospect that his eyes are set. And his su pe.
riority to contemporary Jewish thought is shown
by the fact that in his vision of the future he
is catholic and cosmic. What he is contem-
plating is not a world renovated in order that
one chosen race may be happy and glorious, but
a renovated world for a perfected humanity.
And in his representation of the present aspects of
nature he strikes an extraordinarily modern note
by exhibiting, as it were unintentionally, a deep
and real sympathy with nature in her pain from
her own point of view. The Psalms can supply
examples of a real sympathetic fellowship in the
happiness of creation-a happiness which modern
pessimists strangely ignore. But here we have,
as no,vhere else in the Bible-perhaps nowhere
in ancient literature-a man who feels with the
pain of creation 1. He notes hew much' vanity'
there is in nature-how much that is ineffective
and disappointing, how much waste and sadness
- by reason of the omnipresent law of corruption,

1 St. Paul's word' creation' (verses 20-22) is used in 81. Paul's

ense in Wisd. xvi. 24, xix. 6.

I.

x

306 The Eplstle 10 tile Ronzans

dissolution and decay under which she is laid.
He feels this as from nature's own heart. And he
has an ear for the universal cry of positive pain,
pain as of a woman in travail, which is one at
least of the most unmistakeable voices of nature.
But he has got an explanation of this universal
pain which makes it tolerable to him. It is the
pain which accompanies a birth. The pain, as
in the case of the woman, is to be justified by
the issue. Nature' eagerly expects J as well as
, groans J: and \viU doubtless' remember no more
the anguish, for joy J of that which is the fruit
of her agony. For there is a destiny for the \vhole
material world \\Thich includes man. As man is
to be perfected and spiritualized in body no less
than in mind; so the \vhole man, perfected in
glory, is to have his place in a \vorld emancipated
in like manner from failure and pain.
Perhaps the most important consideration to be
derived from thispassageis that 51. Paul's thought
is equally alien to a one-sided spiritualism and a
one-sided materialism. A one-sided spiritualism,
such as is represented to-day by (most falsely-
called) , Christian Science,' either disbelieves in
the reality of matter altogether, or regards it \vith
its attendant qualities of \veakness and pain as
evil and a thing to be ignored. The religion of

The hope of the creation 3 0 7

the Incarnation, on the other hand, as represented
by St. Paul, recognizes it as God's creation and
the temple of His presence. In our manhood,
as scientific investigation assures us, we can
exercise no activity of spirit except as parts of
a material world, through the senses and by the
instrumentality of the bodily organs. Spirit and
matter are in us so linked together that the real
difficulty to a thinking Christian is to conceive
at all of a 'disembodied' state of the personal
human spirit after death which is in any sense
a living state. But such a 'disembodied' state
-if the word really represents the truth-is
unnatural and temporary. The perfected human
spirit is to have an embodiment which is to be
material, as being truly a body, but also spiritual,
because it is to be the fitting organ of the per-
fected spirit, in no way embarrassing or clogging
its activity by any grossness or corruption. This
IS the Christian hope, definite in principle, if
quite unaccompanied by any anticipated know-
ledge of method or details. And this destiny
of the human body cannot be separated from
the destiny of the material universe as a whole.
Matter as a whole is to have an unending
development like spirit, and a development with
a justifying purpose of glory in it.
X2

308 Tlze Eþistle to the R0111allS

And S1. Paul is equally opposed to the
materialism \vhich gives to matter a substan-
tive existence apart from spirit. Metaphysical
inquiry assures us that ,ve can have no concep-
tion of a material object, or of matter in general,
except as related to a consciousness or spirit;
or, in other words, except as an adjunct to some
sort of personality. Such metaphysical inquiry
did not lie in S1. Paul's way. But he is in
harmony with its results when he contemplates
a glorified nature as still relatiye to glorified
personalities. Nature is to share the revelation
of the glory of the sons of God.
We cannot help wondering, as we read these
verses, whether S1. Paul had in mind that occa-
sion when, before the chosen witnesses, Christ
,vas bodily transfigured on the holy mount by
an anticipation of the glory destined for His son-
ship; and the apostles felt their hearts thereby
encouraged to believe more surely in the teach-
ing of the prophets about the general glory that
,vas to accompany the final manifestation of the
Christ 1.
When St. Paul talks of nature' groaning J and
(still more) 'eagerly expecting,' is it merely a
poetical personification, as Chrysostom and most
1 2 Pet. i. 16- 1 9.

The hope of the creatton 3 0 9

commentators suppose, like that of the Psalmist
when he makes' the floods clap their hands'?
It may be so. George Crabbe, in his Delay IS
Dangerous, draws a singularly beautiful picture
of a late autumn morning as it appeared to a
dejected man, and he ends the description with
the lines :-

These things were sad in nature, or they took
Sadness from him, the likeness of his look.

Is the latter the true eXplanation? Is there no
sadness or eager desire in nature independently
-I will not say of spirit, but of the human spirit?
I t is sometimes very difficult to believe this.
And may not the Christian belief about angels
make the fancy legitimate, that every created
thing has some accompanying intelligence-
higher or lower-which consciously realizes its
beauty and its joy, and also its pain and its
hope? If this be so, then there is not merely
deficiency and pain, but the consciousness of this
deficiency and pain, a real groaning and a real
expectation, in the great fabric of nature. We may
legitimately imagine this; but we have probably
no right to attribute such an imperfectly-based
speculation to St. Paull.

1 Cf. Lathåm, Service of Angels (Cambridge, 1894).

3fO Tlze Eþistle to the ROl1ZaJlS

11.

.
It is very interesting to notice the various
points of vie\v from which St. Paul contemplates
the great ideas of C redemption,' 'adoption,' 'salva-
tion.' Christ redeelned us by the shedding of
His blood, and we entered into the redeemed
state individually and were adopted as sons
,vhen we became Christians. This is, beyond
all question, St. Paul's belief. But when he
contemplates the outward conditions of the re-
deemed man, and finds them quite incongruous
,vith freedom and sonship, so wholly unashamed
is he to require that these outward conditions
shall be transformed, and body as well as
spirit shall be redeemed, that he speaks as if
the great hope were still unrealized and we were
still only expecting to be redeemed and adopted-
, waiting for our adoption, to wit, the redemption
of our body.' He thus retains the intensely
J e,vish language of \vhat we may call Christ's
own Apocalypse, \vhen He bids His disciples, as
the Day of the Lord approaches, to C look up and
lift up their heads: because their redemption
draweth nigh.'
The uses of the words C saved' and C salva-
tion' are still more remarkable. If we are con-

The hOþe of the creation 311

templating the finished work of Christ, ,ve are
led to say, 'By grace have we been saved 1.'
If we are considering our o\vn individual en-
trances into this great salvation at the time
of our believing or becoming Christians in
baptism, we say, I It \vas upon a basis of hope
that we were saved 2.' If we are
onsidering the
progressive life of the believer, we say, 'He is
being saved 3.' If we are looking to the great
and final hope, \ve say, I We shall be saved.'
lOur salvation is nearer than when we became
believers 4.' This simple set of facts about New
Testament language throws a great light on the
popular revivalist question-' Are you saved?'

111.

Our Lord once asked one who came to Him
to be healed-' What \vilt thou that I should do
unto thee?' and a very devout modern \vriter 5
builds upon this an argument that \ve ought
to learn continually to pray with more definite-
ness and detail. Probably it is true to say

1 Eph. ii. 5. 2 Rom. viii. 24.
S I Cor. xv. 2; 2 Cor. ii. 15. (The present tense in both cases.)
{ Rom. v. 9, 10; xiii. II : cr. I Tim. iv. 16; 2 Tim. iv. 18.
ð Andrew Murray's With Clzn'5t ilt the School of Prayer (Nisbet
18 9 1 ), p. 7 1 .

312 TIle Eþls/le to tIle R01nans

that the advanced Christian learns to pray more
definitely for spiritual things, as he grows in
spiritual discerrlment and sees more distinctly
\vhat God's moral will is for himself and others.
But there is no similar growth to be expected
in the knowledge of what outward gifts will '
really help or hinder us and others. And it is
\vith his eye chiefly on the out\vard conditions
of the Christian's life that St. Paul here says-
I We know not what \ve should pray for as ,ve
ought'; and teaches us that 'The Spirit makes
intercession for the saints according to God.'
We must be content to recognize, even while
\ve half-ignorantly pray for what \ve think we
need, that' all (outward) things work together
for good to them that love God.' St. Paul had
learnt that lesson when he himself I besought
the Lord thrice' that his great physical trouble
might be removed from him, and was refused).
The Son of Man Himself prayed only I Father,
1/ t't be þossible, let this cup pass from me,' and
learned in experience that it \vas not possible.
These lessons may suffice to humble anyone
who grows over-confident that he knows what
outward circumstances are best for himself or
his friends or the Church.

1 2 Cor. xii. 8: cf. Phil. i. 22, 'What I shall choose I wot not.'

The hope of the creation 313

We all feel deeply the imperfection of our
prayers: how weak, how ignorant they are!
And St. Paul consoles us with the belief in
an intercession-perfect, all-knowing, divine-
which supports and sustains and, we may say,
includes ours. The' intercession of the Spirit'
in our behal4 carried on, it is implied, 'in the
hearts' of the saints which only God searches,
is mentioned nowhere in the New Testament
but here. But it is not to be separated from
the intercession of Christ which is mentioned
just below 1. Christ's intercession is 'at the
right hand of God,' but also He has by the
Spirit taken us up into His own life. He dwells
in us by His Spirit. By His Spirit we are
knit into one and made His body. Doubtless,
then, dwelling thus by the Spirit in the body,
Christ intercedes for us. This is the inter-
cession of the Spirit, which is also the interces-
sion of Christ-an intercession gathering up into
one, and sustaining and connecting and perfect-
ing, all the imperfect prayers of all the saints.
This interceding Spirit is in Himself per-
fectly conscious of God's mind and purpose,
and God is perfectly conscious of His. He
intercedes' according to God.' This intercession

1 Verse 34.

3 1 4 The Epistle to the R01Jzans

is but a form of the perfect divine life. But
in the heart of the Church this desire of the
Spirit can make itself felt only in groanings for
the divine manifestations which, like the aspira-
tions which music suggests or expresses, are too
deep to admit of articulate utterance. St. Paul,
when he sp
aks of groanings \vhich cannot
be put into words, is perhaps thinking of the
, tongues' in \vhich the spiritual emotion of
the first Christian churches found expression.
And \ve should think of some earnest act of
corporate Christian worship when, under the
,vorkings of the one Spirit, the strong desire
after what is holiest and highest posse
ses men,
and binds them together \vith a sense of longing
for the divine manifestation ,vhich could not be
put into definite ,vords.
St. Paul speaks of the groaning of suffering
nature (ver. 22), and the groaning of the indi-
vidual Christians (ver. 23), and also the groan-
ing of the divine Spirit in the Church (ver. 26).
No word could express more powerfully the in-
tense desire after the manifestation of the divine
kingdom which, in St. Paul's mind, should lie
at the heart of true Christian prayer.
And the true prayer of the Spirit-the prayer
which is according to God-is described (ver. 27)

The hope of the creatzon 315

as 'on behalf of saints 1 '-on behalf of a separated
and consecrated body. It follo\vs, that is to
say, the lines of Christ's own prayer-' I pray
not for the world, but for those whom thou
hast given me.' It is through the sanctified
life that the divine influences are to spread
over the world: and by praying for the conse.
crated body we are praying that that life may
be exhibited more and more perfectly amongst
men so as to strike their consciences and
move them to conversion; that through our good
works which they now behold they may glorify
God in the day when they themselves are
visited. The New Testament method of pray-
ing for the world is thus in great part indirect.
But the direct method is also enjoined. We are
also to pray directly' for all men 2.'

IV.
There is, I think, no point on which St. Paul
has been more misrepresented than on his
teaching about predestination. He teacHes
plainly that it is God's purpose to 'have mercy
upon all': that He 'wiUeth that all men should
be saved and come to the knowledge of the

, Not' the saints' in the Greek.

2 I Tim. ii. I.

3 16 The Epistle to tlte Romans

truth 1.' But He works towards this universal
end through a method of selected human instru-
ments-through an elect body. Such an elect
body had been the Jewish nation-selected, we
cannot tell why, but very possibly in part be-
cause of its capacity for coherence and tough-
ness, coupled with a singular aptitude for simple
religious ideas-qualities which in themselves
of course were the gift of God. This nation
might have expanded, as was intended, into a
catholic church. But, as it refused to corre-
spond with its vocation in this respect, in fact the
catholic Church appears in history as taking
its place, even while it was developed out of it-
an elect body gathered out of 'every nation
and all tribes and peoples a:Id tongues.' The
election of this catholic body to be the heirs
of salvation and to bear the name of God in
the world was, it would have been held, a self-
evident fact. St. Paul reasons not up to this
fact but from it. He uses the admitted fact to
strengthen its individual members under stress
of trial. They must bear earthly troubles
because they form the appointed discipline for
the individuals who form the select body. Let
men but love God, and then all out\vard things

1 Rom. xi. 32; I Tim. ii. 4.

The hope of the creation 317

whatsoever \vork together for good for them.
The fact that they love God is the sufficient
evidence of their election. Those who love
God are also those who are I called according
to His purpose.' But, we ask, Have none re-
ceived the call and rejected it? were none
called, who do not love God? is it not true,
that 'Many are ealled and few chosen'? St.
Paul says not a word to the contrary. But that
is not the question he is considering. The
members of the Christian Church, devoted to
God, to whom he is writing have been called.
This call of which they have become the subject
is, St. Paul assures them, no afterthought, no
momentary act of God, which as it came into
being in a moment so may pass away. It is
not a being taken up by God and then perhaps
dropped again. His gifts and calling are with-
out repentance on His side, because they repre-
sent an eternal will. In the eternal mind God
'foreknew' this chosen body. To' know' as
used of God (in contexts where it is implied that
others are not 'known') means to I take know-
ledge of' or mark out for a divine purpose, as
God said of the Jews, 'You only have I known
of all the families of the earth t,' that is, your

1 Amos iii. 2: cr. Ps. i. 6; Hos. xiii. 5; Matt. vii. 23.

318 The Epistle to the ROl1zans

nation only have I singled out or designated 1.
This divine marking out then was an eternal
act. God eternally marked out certain persons,
those presumably ,vhom a certain preparatory
discipline and moral education,] ewish or heathen,
should have made apt for His purpose, such
aptitude being of course again His gift. Any-
way, for reasons which we cannot probe, God
did eternally foreknow or mark out beforehand
a body of men to be His catholic church. And
those so marked out were in the eternal coun-
sels appointed for a high spiritual vocation, to
be made like the divine Son, who was to be
made man, so that, \vith Christ as heir and
elder brother, they together might represent in
the \vorld the divine ideal for man. And upon
those so marked out and foreordained, in due
time the divine call came by the apostolic
preaching. And, at the first movement of cor-
responsive faith, they had been acquitted of all
their old sins and planted all at once upon
a new basis in Christ ] esus. And those thus
set upon the new basis God also had already
in His divine counsels clothed \vith glory, their
share in the glory of the divine Son ,vhich
is only ,vaiting to be fully manifested. Every
1 Cf. Hort on I Pet. pp. 19, 80.

TIle Ilope of the creation 319

Christian therefore who has felt a movement
of God in his heart, under which he has become
a Christian, kno,vs that he is in God's keeping.
God will not fail him. He who has begun
the good work will perform it. Trouble and
anxiety within or without need not alarm him.
He has but to keep himself, joyful and confi-
dent, in God's hands. The movement of God
upon him and within him, as it proceeds out of
the eternal mind, so it passes securely on into
the eternal issue. No doubt St. Paul would
say they might tear themselves by utter wilful-
ness out of the divine hand, as for the time
at least the Jews had mostly done. But short
of that they are safe. The movement of God,
the protection of God, the purpose of God, is
upon them and around them, and goes before
them preparing their way, individually and cor-
porately.
This is the moral use St. Paul makes of the
doctrine of predestination. And it is to do
egregious violence to his ge!1eral teaching to
suggest that he entertained the idea of persons
created with an opposite predestination-to
eternal misery. St. Paul is dealing here only
,vith what God has already sho\vn of His pur-
pose in the actual vocation of some. Ultimately

320 The Eplstle to the R0112al1s

he assures us all men share the divine purpose
for good 1. But, on the other hand, he never
suggests that they may not resist it, or allows
us to say that so far as concerns themselves
they may not defeat it.

1 See especially Rom. xi. 29-3
.

Christzan assurance

3 21

DIVISION III.
10. CHAPTER VIII. 3 1 -39.

Chrzstian assurance.

ST. PAUL has brought his great argument
to an end. And before he passes to its manifold
application in the later parts of his epistle, he
applies it in words which spring glowing from
a heart on fire with the gospel he loves, to re-
assure disheartened and nervous Christians. It
was a natural feature of the apostolic age that
the disciples should lose their first courage and
become afraid, when the hard experience they
were to expect became plain to them. The
Epistle to the Hebrews is written full in face
of this failure of courage among Jewish Chris-
tians. For the Gentiles whom St. Paul has
more particularly in view there were manifold
causes of alarm-fears derived from their own
weakness, from spiritual uncertainty, and from
their precarious position. I t was not only that
outward calamity-famine and pestilence-might
I. y

3 22

The EPistle to the Romans

.

come on them like other people. They plainly
felt-St. Paul wain1y felt, as he thought of the
bitter hostility of the Jews actually ready to
break out upon the Church, and of the jealousy
of the Empire, not yet hostile but easily capable
of becoming so-that times of persecution were
at hand: that the Christians were truly in the
\vorld as 'lambs in the midst of \volves.' There-
fore he would have them realize the whole
secret of that invincible strength, that power
to endure and triumph, which ought to be
theirs.
What is to be our practical conclusion, he asks,
from all this theology, from all this consideration
of revealed facts and truths? The sum of it all
is that God is not our taskmaster and critical
judge. He is altogether on our side. And if
this be so, \vhose hostility can by comparison
come into consideration at all? God sho,ved
His mind toward us by the greatest possible
act of self-sacrifice, the giving up of His own
divine Son to die for us. And, plainly, if of His
free love He gave us His greatest gift, He will
not fail to accompany it with everything that
love can suggest. Or, to put the matter in an-
other way, if God, in full knowledge of what we
,vere thought proper to take us for His chosen

Clzrzstzan assurance

3 2 3

people and to put us in a position of acceptance
with Him, who can with any hope of success
bring a charge against us or pass condemnation
on us? For we know the mind of the only
judge. Or, once again, what can be so reassur-
ing as to consider the person of our advocate or
mediator? It is Christ Jesus, God's own Son
in our nature, who died a sacrifice for our sins,
but so far from being conquered by death, \vas
raised from among the dead, and exalted to
the right hand of God, and there is occupied in
presenting Himself before the Father in inter-
cession for us--covering all our approach to
God \vith His acceptableness. Out of the pro-
tecting power of this love of Christ, then, who
shall tear us? It is quite true that troubles
may beat upon us-outward affliction, or inward
trouble, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness,
or danger, or sword. We may find that only
the words of the Psalmist 1 suit our case, ' For
thy sake are we being put to death the \vhole
day: the estimate formed of us is that of sheep
meant for slaughter.' But in all these con-
tingencies the love of Christ can supply us
\vith a more than victorious power. For this is
St. Paul's conviction, that no conceivable power

1 Ps. xliv. 22.
Y2

3 2 4 The Epistle to the R01nans

of life or of death, or of the angelic hierarchy,
nothing in present circumstances or future destiny,
no possible force, neither the highest height of
heavens or the deepest depth of hell, no possible
creation of God other than what we now know
to exist, shall be able to tear us from that which
holds us in a grasp stronger than the strongest-
the love of God which is in Christ Jesus, who
is our Lord.
What then shall we say to these things? If God is for
us, who is against us? He that spared not his own Son,
but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not also with
him freely give us all things? Who shall lay anything to
the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth; who
is he that shall condemn? It is Christ Jesus that died,
yea rather, that was raised from the dead, who is at the
right hand of God, \vho also maketh intercession for us.
Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall
tribulation, or anguish, or persecution, or famine, or
nakedness, or peril, or sword? Even as it is \vritten,
For thy sake we are killed all the day long;
We were accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
Nay, in all these things \ve are more than conquerors
through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that
neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor
things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor
height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to
separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus
our Lord.
There is not n1uch that needs comment in
these verses. We may notice the contrast

Chrzstzan assurance 325

between the tone of the Psalmist quoted by
St. Paul-weighed down, like many a servant of
the older covenant, with the unintelligible ex-
perience of the persecution of God's faithful
people-and the exultant faith of St. Paul which
finds no difficulty in the experience at all. Again,
we do well to observe that among the forces
enumerated by St. Paul which cannot tear us
out of the hand of God, he does not include our
own wills, and we could not even conceive him
so including them. Once again, we take note
how 'the love of Christ' (ver. 35) is resolved
(ver. 39) into the 'love of God in Christ Jesus.'
Christ's love is God's love, as Christ is truly
proper and essential to the being of God, His
own very Son.
These words, I say, need very little comment,
but they thrill our souls as hardly any other
words of St. Paul. They are the real summary
of this epistle, and show us how the glorious
apostle of Christian liberty would have us view
our life. We are not to build the edifice of a life
which at the top is to be within sight of God.
We are to start from God who from eternity
and all along has been beforehand with us: in
His external personal love predestinating, creat-
ing, calling, pardoning, holding, and keeping us

326 The Eþlstle to the Ron2ans

in continual gro\vth for eternal glory. And the
one po\ver of religion is therefore faith, that
faculty by which we look continually out of
ourselves, and starting from God, committing
ourselves wholly to God, raise the fabric of life,
in the community of a true human brotherhood,
upon the secure basis of the love of Him who
created us, and \vill satisfy utterly the being
\vhich He has given us. This is the summary
lesson of the great epistle.

END OF VOL. I

A Series of Sz"uzþle ExþOSZtt"01ZS
if
Por/iolzs of the New Testa11zent,

BY THE

RIGHT REV. ClfARLES GORE, D.D.,

LORD BISHOP OF WORCESTER.

Crown 8vo, Green Cloth, 3s.6d. each volume.

THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT.
THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS.
THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
V 01. I. cap. i-viii.
Vol. II. cap. ix-xvi, with Appendices.

OTHER WORI{S

BY THE

RIGHT REV CHARLES GORE, D.D.,

LORD BISHOP OF WORCESTER.

.I(

Cro'wn 8vo 25.6á.
THE MISSION OF THE CHURCH. Four Lectures
delivered in the Cathedral Church of St. Asaph.
CONTENTS :-1. The 1fission of the Church.-II. Unity within
the Church of England.-Ill. The Relation of the Church to
Independent and Hostile Opinion.-IV. The :Mission of the Church
in Society.-Appended Notes.
I It is a twofold work-to sanctify what can be hallowed, to pass juc'gement
on that which must be condemned. From this point of view the mtt rest of
Mr. Gore's new book is great. '-Church Quarterly.
8vo, is.6d.
THE BAMPTON LECTURES, 1891; The In-
carnation of the Son of God.
8vo, 7s.6d.
DISSERTATIONS ON SUBJECTS CONNECTED
WITH THE INCA
NATION.

Crown 8vo, 5S. 11et.
ESSAYS ON CHURCH REFORM. Eleven Essays
on the Present and Future Position of the Church of England.
By the Right Rev. CHARLES GORE, D.D.; and other eminent
British, Colonial, and American writers.
Crown 8vo, 6s.
LUX MUNDI. A Series of Studies in the Religion of
the Incarnation. By Various "Triters. Edited by the Right
Rev. CHARLES GORE, D. D.

LONDON:
JOHN MURRAY, ALBE
1ARLE STREET, W.

f b

227.1
G66ú

93306

Gore, Charles

1
I

93306
v.l

227.1
G6AG
Gore, Charles
St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans

M ri ,

\ L

- ....

.