/ say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience being witness with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and pain in my heart. (Rom. 9:1-2.)
This passage shows clearly that love proves itself not so much in sweetness and delight, but in very great sorrow and bitterness.
Indeed, it finds delight and sweetness in bitterness and sorrow, because it takes upon itself the misery and suffering of others.
Thus Christ was aflame with love in the very great agony of his death. Indeed, according to Blessed Hilary,1 he was filled with greatest joy that he suffered the greatest pain. This is God's way:
"He is wonderful in his saints" (Ps. 68:35), by causing them to rejoice most when they suffer the greatest pain.
For I could wish that I myself were anathema from Christ for my brethren's sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are
Israelites, whose is the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the services of God and the promises, whose are the fathers, and of whom Christ is according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. (Rom. 9:3-5.)
Many2 want to understand this, I do not know why, to refer to the apostle before his conversion, when he was still outside
Christ, indeed, against Christ. But this interpretation is untenable for many reasons. First: He says, "I could wish." Yet only he wishes something whose wish is not yet fulfilled. But he was then already anathema. Second: He wishes to be anathema from Christ.
Hence, we must understand him to be with Christ when he says this. Third: In a similar way we must understand "anathema/'
1 Cf. Hilary, De trin., X, 45.
2 Cf. Gl. ord., also Lyra and Faber. i.e., excommunication, execration, rejection, when he says, "I could wish to be anathema," he must therefore be in communion with Christ, consecrated to him and accepted by him. Fourth: He says, "for my brethren's sake." But then, he was not cursed and execrated for their sake but together with them. Then he did not want to be there for their salvation but he wanted to perish with them.
This leads immediately to the next point. Fifth: The whole context of the passage indicates that he is most fervently concerned for their salvation. He wants to bring Christ to them. And this he certainly did not do earlier. He appealed to them with a sacred oath, because it seems unbelievable that a man should want to be damned in order that the damned might be saved.
And sixth: He alone wishes to be anathema from Christ. This is milder. But before his conversion, he wished instead that Christ and all who belonged to him should be anathema from the whole world, that Christ should be separated from him and everyone else and not he from Christ. Indeed, he wanted to be against Christ, because he was of one mind with the Jews who had excommunicated Christ, excluded him from their city and community, and killed him, while they maintained themselves, believing themselves to be elected. This is why Christ is called "Hermon" in Ps. 133:3: "As the dew of Hermon which descends upon Mount
Zion." And in Ps. 42:6, the church is called together with him "Hermoniim": "I will remember thee from the land of Jordan and Hermoniim, from the little hill/' In Greek, "Hermon" means
"anathema" and "Hermoniim," "anathemas."3 And "anathema" means to be expelled and set apart as the lepers and the unclean are set apart. In this sense, Christ made the prediction to his disciples: "They shall put you out of the synagogues" (John 16:2), i.e., you will be Hermoniim and anathemas, i.e., the rejected and the cursed among the peoples.
This word "I could wish," etc., is therefore the expression of a most excellent and truly apostolic love for Christ as well as for the Jews. For because of a deep love for him, he wishes that great glory should come to Christ from the Jews. For this reason, he is gladly willing to be separated from him but without hating him.
Now this inverted love is the strongest and utmost kind of love: utter self-hatred becomes the sign of the highest love for another.
So then, he wants to see the Jews really saved, and in order that they may achieve this, he is ready to forego his own salvation. He
3 Luther is here dependent on the GL ord. and on Jerome's Biblical Com* mentary.
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS does the same elsewhere in II Cor. 12:15, where he says: "And I will most gladly spend and be spent for your souls."
We should note that these words will appear strange and even foolish to those who regard themselves as holy and who love God with a covetous love, i.e., for the sake of their own salvation and eternal rest and for the purpose of avoiding hell, in other words: not for God's sake but for their own sake. They are the ones who babble that ordered love4 begins with itself and that everyone must first of all wish his own salvation and then his neighbor's as his own. Such notions show that they do not know what it means to be saved and blessed, unless, of course, they take this to mean a happy and good life as they like to imagine it for themselves. But as a matter of fact, to be blessed means to seek in everything God's will and his glory, and to want nothing for oneself, neither here nor in the life to come.
Now, all who truly love God and revere him as a father and friend, not from natural capacity but only through the Holy Spirit, will think these words very beautiful and they will take them as evidence of a truly perfect example: for they submit freely to the will of God whatever it may be, even for hell and eternal death, if God should will it, in order that his will may be fully done; they seek absolutely nothing for themselves. And yet, inasmuch as they themselves so purely conform to the will of God, they cannot possibly remain in hell. For one who surrenders his own self completely to the will of God cannot possibly be forever outside
God. For he wills what God wills. Therefore he pleases God. And when he pleases God, he is loved by him and by this love he is saved.
Now, if someone asks whether God has at any time willed or may ever will that a man should resign himself to hell and that, for the sake of his will, he should let himself be damned or be anathema from Christ, I answer: Yes, in the case of most men and chiefly of those who are still imperfect in love or in the pure devotion to God. For, in their case, the covetous love that is so deeprooted needs to be extirpated. But it cannot be extirpated except by a superabundant infusion of grace or by this most difficult resignation of which we are speaking here. 'Tor nothing unclean shall enter into the Kingdom of God." (Rev. 21:27.)
But now no one knows whether he loves God with a pure heart unless he experiences in himself that should God want it so, he does not wish to be saved or refuse to be damned. For the damned suffer such great torments because they do not want to be damned
4 Cf. Duns Scotus, II Sent., d. 29, q. un.; Gabriel Biel, III Sent., d. 29, q. un., a. 2, concl. 4. or resign themselves to this will of God. And without the grace of God, they cannot do so.
If this is the pain of purgatory (as it seems to me to be), that souls of an imperfect love recoil from the actuality of this resignation until they take it upon themselves and consent to be anathema from God, we are miserable fools5 in so far as we defer the task we should eagerly pursue in this life, namely, to love God perfectly, and, instead, look forward to such a crude distress in the future. Yet no one can be purged unless he is resigned to hell.
But the true saints actually achieve this resignation, because their hearts overflow with love, and they do this without great distress. For they are so completely dedicated to God that nothing seems impossible for them to do, not even the suffering of the pains of hell. And because of this very readiness, they escape from such a punishment. Indeed, they do not need to fear that they will be damned, because they submit gladly and willingly to damnation for God's sake. But it is those who want to escape from damnation that will be damned.
For even Christ suffered damnation and dereliction to a greater degree than all the saints. And his sufferings were not, as some imagine, easy for him. For he really and truly offered himself for us to eternal damnation to God the Father. And in his human nature, he behaved in no other way than as a man eternally damned to hell. Because he loved God in this way, God at once raised him from death and hell and thus devoured hell. All his saints must imitate him in this, some more and some less; the more perfect they are in love, the more readily and easily they will be able to do so. But Christ underwent all this with the most painful suffering of all. Hence, he complains in so many passages of the pains of hell.6
Those, then, who refuse to accept this interpretation let themselves be guided by the imagination of the flesh. They think7 that "to love oneself means primarily to want and desire something good for oneself, but they do not know what this good is and they cannot know what it means to love. "To love" means to hate and condemn oneself, to desire something that is bad for one, in accordance with the word of Christ: "He that hates his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal" (John 12:25). (If someone were to say: But I do not love my life in this world, because I seek what is good for it in the world to come, I answer him as follows:
5 Luther shares this spiritual conception of purgatory with German mysticism. Cf. Theologia Deutsch, 11.
6 Luther thinks here of the psalms, Christologically interpreted.
7 Cf. Gabriel Biel, III Sent, d. 32, q. un., a. 1, n. 1.
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS You do this from self-love, which is a love of this world; therefore, you thereby still love your life in this world.) One who loves himself in this way, practices a true self-love. For he loves himself not in himself but in God, i.e., in accordance with the will of God, and he hates, condemns, and maligns all sinners, i.e., every one of us.
For our good is hidden and that so deeply that it is hidden under its opposite. Thus our life is hidden under death, self-love under self-hatred, glory under shame, salvation under perdition, the kingdom under banishment, heaven under hell, wisdom under foolishness, righteousness under sin, strength under weakness. And generally, every yes we say to any good under a no, in order that our faith may be anchored in God,8 who is the negative essence and goodness and wisdom and righteousness and whom we cannot possess or attain to except by the negation of all our affirmations?
Thus "the Kingdom of Heaven is like unto a treasure hidden in the field/* (Matt. 13:44.) The field is something dirty and is trampled upon, in contrast to the treasure which is singled out. And yet, the field hides the treasure. So also "our life is hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3), i.e., in the negation of all we can feel, have, and comprehend. Likewise, our wisdom and righteousness are not at all apparent to us but are hidden with Christ in God.
Only their opposites are apparent, namely, sin and foolishness, in accordance with the word of the apostle: "Who is wise among you, let him become a fool that he may become wise" (I Cor. 3:18), i.e., let him become wise and rich in God and not in himself; may all wisdom be taken from him and nothing remain but foolishness.
The same applies to all other goods.
Of this kind, then, are the goods we must wish for ourselves (i.e., everything that is bad). For only thus we are conformed to God, and he does not recognize and take account of anything good in us. But we are already good by recognizing only God's good as good and our good as evil, for one who in this way is of one mind with God is wise and good. He knows that outside God there is no good and that all good is in God, as Christ says: "The Kingdom of God is inside you'* (Luke 17:21), i.e., outside you is exile.
Everything that can be seen and touched is outside you. But everything that only faith can believe is inside you.
Hence, it is very dangerous of these people to dispute about a good that is deduced from philosophy, inasmuch as God has turned this good into evil. For although everything is very good (Gen.
1:31), for us nothing is good, and though there are no things that are evil in every respect, yet they are all evil for us, and all this
8 "Ut fides locum habeat in Deo/9 9 Cf. Dionysius Areopagita, Myst. Theol., c. 3-5. because we have sin in us. Therefore, we must shun the good and take evil upon ourselves. And this very thing we must confess not merely by word of mouth and from a deceitful heart but with our whole mind, wishing that we be damned to perdition. For we must act toward ourselves as one does when he hates another. One who hates desires not falsely but seriously to destroy, kill, and damn the one he hates. If we, therefore, sincerely impose destruction and persecution upon ourselves and are ready to go to hell for the sake of God and his righteousness, we shall thereby already satisfy his justice, and he will have mercy on us and set us free. "If we could judge ourselves, we should not be judged by the Lord."
People of this sort have only the one concern to wash away their guilt and to restore the grace of God whom they have offended; they do not seek the Kingdom; they are ready to forego salvation and are freely willing to suffer damnation. But thanks to the grace of God who is already placated, they do not fear punishment but only their enmity against God.
This is contrary to the ways of those who imagine that they have merits and who picture these to themselves while they seek their own kind of good; they shun evils but deep in their hearts they have nothing. For they go along blindly, wholly absorbed in the good they conceived and wished for themselves.
But it is not as though the word of God had come to nought.
For they are not all Israel that are of Israel, neither, because they are Abraham's seed, are they all children, but "in Israel shall your seed be called." That is, it is not the children of the flesh that are children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned for a seed. For this is a word of promise: According to this season will
I come, and Sarah shall have a son. (Rom. 9:6-9.) This word is spoken against the presumptuousness of the Jews and on behalf of grace, so that all proud confidence in righteousness and good works may be undone. For the Jews want to be regarded as the children of the Kingdom because they are the children of Abraham. The apostle reasons against them by an argument that is irrefutable, chiefly because they themselves cannot deny its validity. For if their presumptuous opinion of themselves were correct, also Ishmael and the sons of Keturah (Gen.
25:1 ff.) would be heirs of Abraham and deservedly of the same status with Isaac, but the text says plainly just the opposite. It is, therefore, a vain contention of theirs that they are of the same status with Isaac because they, too, are the sons of Abraham. For this does obviously not follow. If they object and say that Ishmael
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS and the others do not deserve to be of the same status as Isaac, not only because they were evil and deserved to be deprived of their status on account of their sin, but also because they were not the children of the same mother Sarah, he counters with another example without refuting their objections, indeed, by quasi conceding them as valid, although one can read nowhere that the other children had sinned and it is written of Ishmael that he did so only once.
But if one concedes that they did not have the same mother, what, then, about Rebecca? First, there is the same mother; second, they have the same father; and third, there are two brothers of whom neither is as yet good or evil and yet, without desert, one of them is called to sonship and the other to servitude. Hence, it follows irrefutably: one does not become a son of God and an heir of the promise by descent but by the gracious election of God.
Thus and only thus, the Spirit and the grace of God can arise as the pride of the flesh is put down.
So then, why does man take pride in his merits and good works?
They cannot in any way please God, because they are good and meritorious, but only because God has elected from eternity that they would please him. We do the good only on the basis of gratitude, because our works do not make us good, but our goodness or, rather, the goodness of God makes us good and our actions as well. For what we do is not good in itself, but only because God reckons it to be so. Our deeds are good or not good only to the degree in which God does or does not regard them so. Hence, our reckoning or nonreckoning is worth nothing. A man who is aware of this is always trembling in fear and expectation of the divine reckoning. He therefore does not know anything about being proud and contentious in the way of the proud moralists10 who are certain of their good works.
It is therefore wrong to define virtue in the way of Aristotle:11
It makes us perfect and produces laudable acts only in the sense that it makes us perfect and causes our acts to be praiseworthy before men and in our own eyes. Before God this is abominable, and the opposite would please him much more.
And not only so, but Rebecca also having conceived by one, even by our father Isaac. (Rom. 9:10.) Even though the Greek text can be read in both ways: "Rebecca having shared the bed with one, even with our father Isaac" and 11 Cf. Aristotle, Eth. Nicom., I, 12.
"having shared the bed with one, even the bed of our father Isaac,"12 the second reading is the better one, so that nobody may cast aspersions on Sarah by thinking that Rebecca conceived by one husband and Sarah by many. The meaning of the text is this:
Flesh and physical descent are of so little significance for the adoption to sonship that even Rebecca, the holy woman, having shared only the bed of the holy man Isaac, the father of all the Children of Israel, received the divine promise for only one of her sons in order that only he and not the other one should possess and inherit the promise. Hence, every one of these words must be specially emphasized: "having shared the bed of Isaac, our father," i.e., it was of no advantage to Esau that he had such a father and such a mother and that, like Jacob, he was so chastely conceived and born according to the flesh and even that he was the first-born.
Of how much less advantage will it be to the unbelieving Jews, who were born so much later, that they are the sons of the patriarchs by physical descent if they are found to be without faith, i.e., if they were not elected by God!
Finally, we must note that the apostle, writing in Greek, speaks with much more modesty than his translator, for he says "bed" but the latter, "coition."13 Thus he caused many to understand the apostle as if he had wanted to say that Rebecca conceived twins at one coition.
For the children being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of him that calls, it was said to her:
The elder shall serve the younger. Even as it is written: Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. (Rom. 9:11-13.) He puts it well when he says "neither having done anything good or bad" rather than "neither being good or bad," for there can be no doubt that both were bad in virtue of original sin, even though some think that Jacob was sanctified in his mother's
12Lit., "Ex uno cubile habens" The Vulgate reads "patris noslri" Erasmus prefers "patre nostro"
13 The Greek term is koiten which, in the Vulgate, is translated concubitus.
Faber has cubile. Erasmus discusses both terms.
It is to be noted that, from here on, Luther constantly refers to Erasmus.
At the end of February, 1516, the printer Froben of Basel published Erasmus' Greek edition of the New Testament and also Erasmus' Annotationes
Novi TestamentL Ficker surmises (p. XXIX) that Luther began his lectures of the summer semester, 1516, with an exposition of the ninth chapter of the letter to the Romans, having been occupied with chapters 1 to 8 during the two preceding semesters. It is obvious, therefore, that Luther began to use the work of Erasmus almost immediately after publication.
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS womb.14 But according to their own merit they were alike and equally belonged to the same mass of perdition.
What shall we say then? Is there injustice15 with God? No.
The apostle furnishes no other proof for the statement that there is no injustice with God than that he says: "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy" (Rom. 9:15), which is the same as to say: I will have mercy to whom I intended to be merciful or to him who was predestined to receive my mercy.
This is hard to take for the proud who claim to know everything, but it is sweet and welcome to the meek and humble, for they despair of themselves and this is why the Lord accepts them.
For there is no other reason for his justice and there can be no other than his will. Why, then, does man grumble about the impossible, namely, that God does not act according to the law?
Could it be possible that God is not God? Moreover, inasmuch as his will is the highest good, why are we not ready and eager to see it done, especially in view of the fact that it cannot possibly be evil? And if you say: But to me it is evil, I answer: No. It is evil to no one. But the fact that his will cannot be managed and that men cannot cause it to be done, this is an evil to them. If one wills what God wills, even if this means to be damned and rejected, one has no evil. Then one wills what God wills and patience enables one to bear it.
For he says to Moses: I will have mercy to whom I have been merciful and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. (Rom. 9:15.)
The Greek text reads:16 "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion," i.e., to whom I have mercy in the moment of predestination, to him I shall be merciful in fact also later. The present tense "I have mercy" signifies the intrinsic mercy of him who predestines, and the future tense, the mercy that is given to the predestined one. The same applies to the phrase "I will have compassion."
The Hebrew text reads: "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious." (Ex.
33:19.) This is, as it were, indefinitely put. It speaks of mercy more 14 Cf. GL ord. ad Hos. 12:3, which reads as follows (in the Vulgate): "In the womb he supplanted his brother, and by his strength he had success with an angel."
15 The Vulgate has "iniquitas"; Luther reads "inustitia." lG Luther follows Erasmus' translation. in terms of a chance without specific reference to predestination.
In the same way he says in Ex. 3:14: "I am who I am" or "I shall be who I shall be."
He uses this mode of expression apparently in order to rebuff people who anxiously inquire about their own and others' predestination (as if he wanted to keep them back from all thinking and inquiring about predestination). As we commonly say: I get it when I get it, and when it hits me, it hits me,17 i.e., nobody can know on whom I will have mercy and on whom I will have compassion. Nobody can be certain about it because of his merits or works or anything else. Hence, this is a saying that instills fear and humiliation.
We must note, therefore, that in Hebrew, the first mentioned word "I will have mercy" means "having mercy on someone" in the sense that he who has mercy bestows a gift or a benefit upon another, even one who has given no offense or committed no sin, but is merely poor and in want. Hence, "Hannan" (which, in Hebrew, means "one who has shown mercy") signifies "one who has given a benefit." Hence, "Hanna" means "grace" or "benefit" or "good gift." The same is true for Johannan or Johannes with the Greek ending.
"I will be gracious" or "I will show compassion" means "to forgive" or "to be gracious." This can become real also without the gift of grace in the case of one who has committed an offense that deserves punishment. Thus, when God remits the penalty of hell and forgives sin, he shows compassion, but he is merciful to one on whom he bestows the gift of grace and the Kingdom of God. The Hebrew word for this is "richem."18
So then, it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that has mercy. (Rom. 9:16.) We must not understand this to mean: The only thing that matters is God's mercy and therefore it is not necessary for anyone to will and to run, but we must take it to say: A man owes his ability to will and to run, not to his own power, but to the mercy of God who gave him this power to will and to run. Without it, man could neither will nor run. As the apostle says in Phil. 2:13: "It is God who achieves in you both to will and to work." Here he expresses exactly the same meaning, but in different words: "It is not of him that wills nor of him that runs," i.e., who achieves, "but of God that has mercy," i.e., who gives the gift of his grace.
17 Luther uses the German expression: "Wem es wirt, dem zoirt es; wen es trifft, den trifft es."
18 Cf. Faber and Erasmus.
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS So it says also in Ps. 119:32: "I have run the way of thy commandments," i.e., I have achieved, "when thou didst enlarge my heart," i.e., when thou enablest me to run. And in Ps. 1:2: "And his will is in the law of the Lord." (If someone should ask what it means "to run," I should answer that it means "to live and have one's being in God." This is why the life of the righteous is called a "way," as in Ps. 1:6: "For the Lord knows the way of the righteous.")
So also in Jer. 10:23: "I know, O Lord, that the way of a man is not his; neither is it in a man to walk and to direct his steps." Now all these sayings contain a contradiction of a sort. For if a man's way is not his way, why, then, does it say "his way"? The way of man is not his way. So also here: The race is not of him that runs" nor the will "of him that wills." It is a strange thing! The will is not his that wills and the race is not his that runs, but God's who gives and creates it. In the same way, the apostle says in Gal. 2:20:
"I live, yet not I." And Christ says: "My teaching is not mine."
(John 7:16.) And Eccl. 9:11: "I saw that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor bread to the wise, nor riches to the learned, nor favor to the skillful." Whose is it then?
Is the race, then, to those that sit and yawn? And the battle to the weak? Certainly not! But they all are the instruments of God who "works all in all" (I Cor. 12:6). Similarly, cutting wood is not the doing of the ax but of the cutter, and beating a dog is not the doing of the stick but of him that wields it. Hence, the word of Isa. 10:13 ff. is directed against people who boast of the strength that enables them to inflict damage and injury upon others: "The king of Assyria said: By the strength of my own hand I have done it," etc. And then there follows this: "Shall the ax boast itself against him that cuts with it? Or shall the saw exalt itself against him by whom it is drawn? As if a rod should lift itself up against him that lifts it up, and a staff exalt itself which is but wood!" And, farther on, in Isa. 41:23, he laughs at them and says: "Do good or evil, if you can," i.e., let us see whether, without my help, you do good to anyone in need. Experience plainly shows that nobody can heal or help those whom God punishes.
The same applies also to the opposite: doing evil, i.e., inflicting injury upon others. To be sure, many attempt to do great things, but they do not succeed because God resists them or refuses to cooperate with them. This is plainly apparent in the case of Pharaoh.
He wanted to inflict injury on the Children of Israel and could not do so. And thus God demonstrated his power in him: he could not will it, because he was hardened; and he could run even less than he could will.
Now it does not follow from this text that a man's running and willing amount to nothing, but what follows from it is that they do not come from his own strength. For the work of God is not nothing. And a man's willing and running is God's work. Indeed, the apostle speaks here about a willing and running according to God, i.e., about a life of love and divine righteousness. But there is a willing and running that is vain—namely, that of those who do not will and run in the way of God, though they may will great things and run strongly. For what they do is not from God and does not please him. It is of these that Isa. 41:24 says: "You are of nothing and your work of that which has no being."
Yet I want to give here this warning: No one whose mind has not yet been purged, should plunge into these speculations, lest he fall into an abyss of horror and despair. He must first purge the eyes of his heart in meditating on the wounds of Christ.1* Nor would I talk about this, did not the order of the lectures and necessity compel me to do so. For this is very strong wine and the most wholesome meal and solid food for the perfect, i.e., it is theology in the best sense of the word,20 about which the apostle says: "We speak wisdom among the perfect" (I Cor. 2:6). I myself am still a little one in Christ that needs milk and not solid food. (I Cor. 3:1-2.)
Let him who is as I am do likewise. The wounds of Christ, "the clefts in the rock," are safe enough for us.21
Those that are strong and perfect may discuss the first book of the Sentences, which properly should not be the first but the last book.22 But nowadays many read this book hurriedly and heedlessly—with the result that they become strangely blinded.
Thou wilt say then unto me: Why does he still find fault? for who resists his will? Nay, but, O man, who are you that reply against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it:
Why didst thou make me thus? (Rom. 9:19-20.) Some, like Laurentius Valla, take this phrase23 to be passive; Stapulensis understands it as referring to a person; but Erasmus
*9 Ficker (p. 400, n. 3) points out that these ideas of Luther's, which seem to be under the influence of Bernard of Clairvaux, are reflected in the penitential practices and in the religious art of the Middle Ages.
20 "Excellentissima theologia."
21 In the Gl. ord., and also the commentaries of Lyra and Faber, "in foraminU bits'* ("in the clefts of the rock") is interpreted as in "vulneribus Christi"
("in the wounds of Christ").
2 21 Sent., d. 35, where predestination and the problems of the divine will are discussed.
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS says that all Greek interpreters take it as a deponent, and he agrees with them.24 Now one must know that the apostle cites this word in the name of people who contend against God in their ungodly pride and indignantly grumble against him as if he were an evildoer and someone like them. This is why the Greek text does not say as ours does: "Who are you that you reply to him?" but "that you reply against" or "in opposition to" him;25 in other words: you make bold to quarrel with your Creator and to oppose him and speak up against him and you are not willing to yield him an inch of ground.
Now, it would not be a sin at all if someone were to say to God fearfully, humbly, and devoutly: "Why didst thou make me thus?
Even if he would blaspheme God while under the overwhelming power of an assault upon his faith,26 he would not perish because of this. For our God is no impatient or cruel God, even toward the ungodly. I say this in order to comfort those who are constantly plagued by blasphemous thoughts and are in very great trepidation.
Indeed, because it is the devil that forcibly extorts such blasphemies from men against their will, they are sometimes more agreeable to God than the sound of a hallelujah or an anthem of praise. For the more horrible and horrid a blasphemy is, the more agreeable it is to God if only the heart feels that it does not want to utter it, because it has not freely brought it forth from itself.
If a man is filled with fear and trembling because he has uttered a blasphemy, this is a sign that he did not really want to do it and that he did it innocently. This dread of evil is an evident sign that one has a good heart. Hence, the best cure for such thoughts is not to be concerned about them.
As an example, take Job, who was a great saint. The Holy Spirit was his witness that he had not sinned against God with his lips or said anything foolish against him in all his trials.27 Yet more than once he spoke up against God in this way: "What is man that thou shouldst magnify him, or why dost thou set thy heart upon him? How long wilt thou not spare me, and why dost thou not let me go?" (Job 7:17, 19). And again: "Against a leaf that is carried away with the wind thou showest thy power and thou pursuest a dry straw." (Job 13:25.) But his plainest word is this: "Why didst thou bring me forth out of the womb?" (Job 10:18). Jeremiah and Habakkuk raise the same complaint against God.28
2 4 Cf. Laurentius Valla, Annotationes in Novi Testamenti inter-pretationem (ed. Erasmus), Paris, 1505, f. 28. Also, Faber and Erasmus.
2 5 Luther follows Erasmus.
2« "Si ex abundant! tentationisviolentia blasphemaret"
2 8 Cf. Jer. 20:18. There is no saying of this kind in Hebrews, For the Scripture says unto Pharaoh: For this purpose did I raise thee up, that I might show thee my power, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. (Rom. 9:17.)
If we ask: Is the apostle in saying this consistent with what he stated before? we must answer that he speaks in a most orderly fashion. For he had stated that everything happens according to God's election: Jacob was loved by God because he was chosen; and he obtained mercy because it thus pleased God from eternity.
As he said to Moses: "I will show mercy," etc. (Ex. 33:19.) To these statements he properly adds the corollary which is plainly implied in them, namely, that it is only because of the mercy of God that someone is beloved and righteous, inasmuch as all belong to the same mass of perdition and none is righteous before God, unless he has mercy on him. And then there follows the sentence:
'Tor the Scripture says." Its meaning is this: that all depends on God's mercy and not on anyone's willing is plainly shown by the fact that in order to demonstrate this and to let man know that his willing and running is not due to his running but to the divine mercy, God set Pharaoh over the Children of Israel, driving them into utter despair so that they would understand that they could not escape from Pharaoh by their own strength but only by the power of the merciful God. Thus their escape was not their own achievement but that of the Lord who led them.
Today, he deals with his elect in the same way: In order to humble them and to teach them to rely on his bare mercy, putting down all presumptuous confidence in their own willing and doing, he lets them be afflicted to the point of desperation and causes them to be persecuted by the devil, the world, and the flesh. Indeed, again and again and particularly in this our time, he incites the devil to drive his elect into horrible sins and to have dominion over them for a time, or at least constantly to obstruct their good intentions, so that they do the opposite of what they want to do, and all this to such an extent that they even take pride in not being able to will or to do anything good. And yet, through it all,
God continues to be their guide: he finally sets them free when they become hopeless and find themselves driven to despair over the fact that they want to do and actually do so much evil and that they do not have the will or intention to do any of the good toward which they aspire. Thus, yes, thus it comes about that "he shows his power and that his name is declared throughout all the earth."
Note that ''virtus" (power) means the same as "potentia"
(power), a word that is used in the passage that follows a little farther on (Rom. 9:22): "to make his power known." Our translator, strangely enough, translates the word "virtus'9 in various
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS ways29 using interchangeably such common terms as fortitudo (strength), imperium (dominion), virtus (power), potentia (power), potestas (power). But there is a great difference between them. For the Greek word dynamis, the Hebrew word gebura, and the Latin words vis, vires, robur, and, very characteristically, virtus signify that by which one is strong enough actually to conquer and break down what one tries to break down. The opposite is called in the Scriptures "infirmitas" (weakness), and not aegritudo (sickness) or morbus (disease). For example, it says: 'Tower is made perfect in weakness/'30 (II Cor. 12:9.) And again: "It was weakened, but thou hast made it perfect." (Ps. 68:10.) And Ps. 6:2: "Have mercy on me,
O Lord, for I am weak/' or, as we say in German: Graff tlos, machtloss (powerless), the opposite of Crefftig^ mechtig (powerful) in the sense of Er vermag vill (he can do much), vermags nit (he is not able to do much), er kans woll thun (he is able to do it).31 Thus we say also of God: "God is able to perform" (Rom 4:21) and likewise: "God is mighty in battle" (Ps. 24:8).
But the Greek word exousia signifies "power" (potestas) in the sense of a free faculty and license to dispose of something. It signifies a power of peace, so to speak, while the other {potentia) is a power of war. For with respect to what we possess and own, we have the free faculty and power of disposal, but, with respect to what we oppose, we are powerful and strong.
In Hebrew, there is still another word for strength (fortitudo).
It is ethan, i.e., hard, robust. Strictly speaking, it signifies a passive power, i.e., a power that is capable of sustaining an active power.
In German, we say fest (strong). Numbers 24:21: "Thy habitation is indeed strong," just as rock is strong or a castle or the city about which the Lord says in Isa. 50:7: "I have set my face on a very hard rock." In the same way, we call someone strong who cannot be twisted or put down. We also call a stiff-necked person strong, one who does not let himself be persuaded, but then we mean something opposite to gebura. As we say in the proverb: "Two hard stones cannot grind/'32 For when gebura (virtus) and ethan
(fortitudo) balance each other, they cannot do anything. For when two are equally balanced, there can be no action between them.
But to return to our text: God raised up Pharaoh in order to 29Faber and Erasmus explain virtus as potentia) Faber also uses potestas.
Cf. Bid, III Sent., d. $3, a. 1, n. 1.
30 "Virtus in inflrmitate perficitur."
31 Luther uses his own spelling for kraftlos, machtlos; er vermag viel; er ver» mag's nicht; er kann's wohl tun.
32 "Duo lapides fortes non molunt" ("Zwei feste Steine mahlen nicht"). Cf.
E. Thiele, Luthers Sprichwortersammlung, demonstrate his power. For he cannot demonstrate his power in his elect, unless he first shows them their weakness by concealing their power and reducing it to nothing so that they cannot glory in their own power. But he could not accomplish this unless he raised up against them one stronger than they to reduce their power to nothing, so that then only God's power might become manifest in the fact that they are free. The meaning of the passage, then, is this: I have raised you up in order that you should put down the proud presumption of my people so that they will cry unto me out of their oppression and so that my power may be magnified in them and in you. This is the meaning I have followed in the Gloss.33
We can also read the text differently: perhaps it would be better to understand the term "power" with reference, not to our salvation, but to the destruction of others. In this case, the sense of the whole passage would be this: Jacob, who was made good because
God had mercy on him, is the chief example of the fact that everything depends solely on God's being merciful and not on anyone's willing and running; and Pharaoh is an example of the fact that no one can become good if God is not merciful to him. We have then an example for both possibilities: it is of God who has mercy if someone runs, and if he does neither will nor run, this is not of God who has mercy but of God who hardens: I like this interpretation because, from either example, one can at once conclude that "he has mercy on whom he will, and whom he wills he hardens"
(Rom. 9:18). Moreover, I like this interpretation also in the light of the saying: "That I might demonstrate in you my power"
(Rom. 9:17). He wills that his power should be magnified in man's perdition.
Or has not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor and another unto dishonor?
What if God, willing to show his wrath and to make his power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath, fitted for de* struction, that he might show the riches of his glory on the vessels
83 In the Gloss, Luther interprets Rom. 9:17 as follows (WA 56, 92, 15): "The power to save is mine alone, and it does not lie in anybody else's power, merit, or righteousness, or in any other good. It is this I wanted to demonstrate and call to your attention by the fact that I hardened you and that I freed Israel. In other words: I cause and did cause all this to happen, in order to show that the election of my grace brings salvation and that those who were elected are saved but that those who were not elected are rejected.
This knowledge of grace would not come about if God did act in this way, but if everyone persisted presumptuously in believing in his own righteousness as if he could be saved by his effort and not by the mercy of God/'
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS of mercy, which he has prepared unto glory? Even us whom he has also called, not only of the Jews, but also of the Gentiles. As in Hosea he says: I will call that which was not my people, my people; and her that was not beloved, beloved; and her that had not obtained mercy, one that has obtained mercy. And it shall be, in the place where it was said unto them: You are not my people; there they shall be called the sons of the living God. (Rom. 9:21-26.)
Blessed Augustine writes in Chapter 99 of the Enchiridion:** "The whole human race was condemned in its apostate root by a divine judgment so just that not even if a single man were saved from it, no one could possibly rail against God's justice. And those that are saved had to be saved on such terms that it would show, by contrast with the greater number of those not saved but abandoned to their wholly just damnation, what the whole mass deserved and to what end God's merited judgment would have brought them, had not this undeserved mercy intervened, so that 'every mouth' of those disposed to glory in their own merits 'would be stopped' (Rom. 3:19), and that 'he that glories may glory in the This is a significant statement that should be carefully considered, for it makes us humble and has a deterrent effect upon us.
Indeed, Blessed Augustine shows admirably why the apostle spoke as he did, namely, in order to instruct us in humility. It is plainly not the purpose of his words to lead us to the horror of despair but to induce us to praise grace and to put down all presumptuous pride. This is a salutary despair. Hence, Blessed Augustine says in Chapter 98 of the same book:35 "Indeed, referring everything to a very profound and salutary mystery, and looking the Holy
Scriptures straight in the eye, so to speak, the apostle seems to give the admonition that 'he who glories should glory in the Lord' "
(I Cor. 1:31). And again he writes in the same place:36 "God shows mercy out of his great goodness and hardens out of no wickedness, so that he who is saved has no basis for glorying in any merit of his own and he who is damned no basis for complaining of anything except what he has fully merited. For grace alone separates the redeemed from the lost, all having been mingled together in the one mass of perdition arising from a common cause which leads back to their common origin."
Such words cause a man to recognize his damnation and to despair of the possibility that he can be saved by his own powers.
Ordinarily, the idea that he is fallen in Adam leaves him cold, for 34 Augustine, Enchiridion, 99. he hopes, indeed he presumes, to be able to raise himself by his own free will. But here he is given to understand that grace raises him up before and beyond all his free will.
And Isaiah cries concerning Israel: If the number of the Children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, it is the remnant that shall be saved. (Rom. 9:27.)
The term "remnant" and similarly the idea expressed in this particular saying can be found frequently in the books of the Prophets. For example, in Isa. 4:3: "And it shall come to pass that everyone that shall be left in Zion and that shall remain in Jerusalem shall be called holy, everyone that is written in life in Jerusalem." And Isa. 46:3: "Hearken unto me, O house of Jacob and all the remnant of the house of Israel." Isaiah 65:8: "As if a grape be found in a cluster, and it be said: Destroy it not, because it is a blessing, so will I do for the sake of my servants that I may not destroy the whole. And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob," i.e., a remnant, etc. And Amos 3:12: "As if a shepherd should get out of the lion's mouth two legs or the tip of an ear: so shall the Children of Israel be taken out." Micah 2:12: "I will bring together the remnant of Israel." And Micah 5:7: "And the remnant of Jacob shall be in the midst of the nations as a dew from the In this way, then, and in many other places, the apostles and the faithful among the Jews are called "the remnants" or "the remains," even "the dregs" of the people of Israel, as if the better part of them had to perish. As we read in Isa. 49:6: "It is a small thing that you should be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to convert the dregs of Israel. Behold, I have given you to be a light," etc. And in Ps. 78:31 it is said: "And he slew the fat ones among them and brought down the chosen men of Israel," i.e., the dregs and the lowly ones are saved, but the nobler ones are made blind. Just as when a whole cluster of grapes is thrown away and only one berry is left over.
This remnant is represented by the few poor people who were left behind in the country at the time of the exile to Babylon, when the king and queen and the prophets, i.e., the powerful, the wise, and the saints, had to go away (II Kings 24:12 ff.). In this same way, the Jews of today have migrated to the true Babylon of unbelief; all the nobler ones have done so with the exception of the few they left behind. It is this migration which Jeremiah deplores in his Lamentations (Lam. 1:3 ff.). In spirit he sees that what happened then really signifies what is occurring today.
They are also symbolized by the Amalekite boy in I Sam.
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS 30:11 ff., who was left behind by his master that had gone on with his troop and his spoil. This is why Isaiah says of the few who were left behind in Israel (Isa. io:i7f.): "And Israel shall run away through fear, and they that remain of the trees of the forest shall be so few that they shall easily be numbered, and a boy shall write them down." The trees of the forest are the people of the synagogue, very dense and tall in the boastful multitude of the They are called a "remnant" because they are left over, as one can plainly see here in the prophecy of Isaiah. For while God gave the others up to destruction, he kept only these for himself as a seed for another people.
For the Lord shall consummate his word and cut it short in righteousness; because a short word shall the Lord make upon the earth. And as Isaiah foretold: Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seedy we had been as Sodom and Gomorrah. What, then, shall we say? That the Gentiles who followed not after righteousness have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith? But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. Why so? Because they sought it not by faith but, as it were, by works. (Rom. 9:28-31.)
The words "he shall consummate and cut short" refer to the Spirit and the letter, for the flesh and the wisdom of the flesh are in no way capable of comprehending the righteousness and wisdom of God. Therefore, this word of righteousness and wisdom, which is the word of faith, must be contracted and shortened so that it can in no wise be extended to the flesh and its wisdom and righteousness, and neither comprehends it nor is comprehended by it. Hence, carnal persons must necessarily take offense at it and find themselves standing outside it and cut off from it.
For before this word of faith, the word of the Spirit, was revealed, everything was veiled in sign and shadow on account of the slowness of the Jews; the word was incomplete and imperfect and therefore easily intelligible to all, because it spoke in signs about things that are accessible to the senses. But as soon as God turned away from the sensible and from signs and began to speak the word of the Spirit, the word of faith which is hidden, and thus brought forth the complete and perfect word, it had neccessarily to be cut off from everything that can be perceived by the senses and from all signs and symbols. Thereby all who wanted to hold on to sense and symbol were also cut off, or rather: the word was cut off from them.
It is on account of these people who have fallen that the apostle says "he will cut short the word" rather than the reality manifested by the word. For, having rejected what can be seen and withholding what is yet to come and cannot be seen, he placed only his word in their midst. Whosoever does not believe, therefore, will perish. (Isa. 7:9.) For an unbeliever is not content with the word and is indignant at the fact that the reality it expresses is denied to him.
To those who "cut" themselves "short" and "consummate" themselves, this shortened and consummated word will bring righteousness, but to all others, sin and unrighteousness because of their unbelief. For it is "a word that is consummated and cut short in righteousness," i.e., all who believe in this word are righteous. But no one believes unless he keeps his thinking bound to the invisible and unless he cuts himself off from the contemplation of all that is visible.37 For the word is "cut short" also in this sense that it is cut off and separated from all that can be seen. It promises and exhibits nothing visible but rather abnegates it and cuts it off. It teaches that one must renounce the visible. And this because it is the "consummated," i.e., perfect, word that cannot signify anything else but the perfect and complete.
Every word, namely, that signifies and proclaims something visible and created, is on this account not complete and perfect, because it proclaims a part and not the whole, i.e., something that does not satisfy the whole man, but only titillates a part of him, his flesh and the senses. But if it is to proclaim the perfect that satisfies the whole man, it must not proclaim anything that satisfies the flesh, i.e., something created or visible, but God alone.
Hence, it is cut short precisely in being consummated, and, conversely, in being cut short it is consummated. For it is consummated on behalf of the Spirit, because it proclaims what is good for the Spirit. Its being cut short, however, is directed against the flesh, because it rejects all that is good for the flesh.
The word of the letter or of the old sign was thus, by contrast, imperfect and incomplete because it had to be understood with respect to temporal goods and promises, and, for this reason, it was prolonged and extended rather than cut short. For it caused the Spirit to be more and more removed and separated from his goods or from the understanding of his goods.
To summarize briefly:
As the word of the law carnally understood was an imperfect, dilated, or extended word, so the word of the Spirit, i.e., of the law spiritually understood, is a consummated and abbreviated word.
It was imperfect because it signified something but did not ac37 "Ab intuitu omnium visibilium"
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS tually display what it signified. On this account, it was dilated and extended, for it led more and more to the imperfect and carnal, inasmuch as it is impossible to display the spiritual as long as one regards and understands it as something carnal. So it is also with a sign: as long as one takes it for that which it signifies, one does not really have what it signifies. So also this word did not lead in the end "to righteousness," but to wickedness, deceitfulness, and vanity.
On the other hand, the word of the gospel is complete, because it actually makes available what it signifies, namely, grace. For this very reason, it is also abridged, for it does not defer the actualization of what it announces. Indeed, it cuts itself off from everything that postpones and impedes its actualization. Therefore, it is also "cut short in righteousness/' for it avails righteousness to those for whom it is consummated and abridged, and this happens through faith.
The word of the old and the new law is the same. Hence, it can be called perfect or not perfect, short or long, only in terms of our understanding or lack of understanding. Those, therefore, who understand the most sacred gospel in terms of pride or error (as the heretics and individualists38 do) fashion for themselves from the consummated and abridged word an imperfect and long one, i.e., a vain, useless, and deceitful word.
For no one can receive the word of Christ unless he abjures everything else and rids himself of it, i.e., unless he humbly surrenders also the sovereignty of his reason and his whole mind.39
But because most people, persisting in their pride, do not take hold of the word or, rather, are not taken hold of by it, hardly a remnant is saved; the word is cut short in those who perish and consummated in those who believe.
This is the allegorical "abridgment and consummation," i.e., this is what the letter means in so far as it signifies the spiritual word. But the same meaning can be found by the moral interpretation. For because the word of the Spirit pronounces a "No" upon all pride and self-will, it must equally pronounce a "No" also upon all who are proud and sufficient to themselves in their own knowledge, and it must cut itself off from them. Thus the tropological
"abridgment" implies the allegorical one. For because the word consummates and perfects humility and a willing obedience, it
S8"Monii" ("singulares"); cf. Luther's comments on Rom. 4:7 and Rom. 7:8.
39 WA 56, 408, 23 ff.: "Quia verbum Christi non potest suscipi nisi abnegatis et precisis omnibus, i.e., etiam intellectu captivato et omni sensu humiliter submisso" also consummates and perfects all men who are humble and ready to obey. And so the moral "consummation" implies also the allegorical one.
Faith, then, is the consummation and abridgment and compendium of salvation. For the word that is abridged is nothing else but faith. How can we prove this? The word is abridged only for one who understands that it is abridged. But one can have the understanding only by faith. Hence, faith is life and the living word that is abridged.
Notice that it is a short "evidence of things not seen" (Heb.
11:1), i.e., how it cuts one off and separates one from everything.
In the same way, the believer also cuts himself off from everything by his faith, so that he has his being in that which is not apparent.
Then faith is a consummation, because it is "the substance of things hoped for" (Heb. 11:1), i.e., mastery and power over the things of the future which are eternal,40 but not of the things of the present; from them it cuts one off.
The apostle adds in equity41 or "righteousness." For also the word of the dead letter is consummated and abridged, but in the opposite way, namely, in unrighteousness. Just as the word of the Spirit consummates humility and the humble, and cuts short pride and the proud—i.e., perfects those that are spiritual and destroys those that are carnal, perfects the wisdom of the Spirit and does away with the wisdom of the flesh, builds up Jerusalem and destroys Jericho42—so, by contrast, the word of the dead letter consummates and hardens the proud and destroys the humble, perfects the wisdom of the flesh and does away with the wisdom of the spirit, destroys Jerusalem and builds up Jericho. Thus one is the word that is consummated and abridged "in righteousness" and the other that which is consummated and abridged "in unrighteousness."
It is, then, sufficiently plain that these two terms refer to different things: "consummated" to the terminus ad quern, "cut short"
(or abridged) to the terminus a quo. "Consummated" indicates where this word leads to, namely, to the perfection of righteousness, but "cut short" what the word turns one from, namely, from the wisdom of the flesh and unrighteousness. From those who want neither of these two, the word remains entirely cut off, leaving them in the flesh and in unrighteousness.
This word can be likened to a coat or a cover that is too short:
40 "he., possessio et facultas futurarum verum, quae sunt etcrnae." Cf. Luther's comments on Heb. 11:1 in his commentary (WA 57, 228).
4 1 The Vulgate has "in aequitate."
42 In the moral interpretation of Josh., ch. 6, Lyra takes Jericho to mean "the city of the devil" and Jerusalem "the city of God."
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS it covers one but leaves the other naked; Isa. 28:20: "The bed is so narrow that the other one must fall out, and the coat so short that it cannot cover them both." The word of faith is just as narrow, so that two cannot rest in it, but one, namely, the "old man" in us must fall out, because he does not lay hold of it. And one and the same coat cannot cover them both, but only the "new man" in us. The word is then perfect and consummated indeed, because it consummates man wonderfully and exceedingly well, but it is short indeed, because it consummates no one who is an "old man," but it cuts him off from everything. In other words:
God will bring about a consummation, but one that is very short and narrow. For in the case of most men, it will be abridged in so far as it will cut off the whole old man in accordance with the perfection of the consummation; hence, the extent of the "abridgment." Now almost the entire people of Israel were carnal and gloried in the flesh; hence, the abridgment that happened among them was a vehement one in proportion to the multitude of carnal men. Nor would it have been strange if all had been cut off (for they were all children of the flesh, and as to the old man in them, all were the descendants of their fathers), if the Lord had not left a seed.
Therefore, "the consummation abridged shall overflow with righteousness." (Isa. 10:22.) It is a strange thing, this consummation overflowing with righteousness which is nevertheless short and narrow. Who has ever seen a narrow flood? And who has seen a "being consummated" which is at the same time a "narrowing," a becoming perfect that is at the same time a being diminished, something that is simultaneously minimized and magnified, simultaneously filled and emptied. Yet here it happened: What is wonderfully clothed and covered is yet almost entirely naked and bare.
What God has promised is fulfilled and yet at the same time cut off from nearly everything. But where it is fulfilled, it is overflowingly consummated in righteousness.
They stumbled at the stumbling stone. As it is written: Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and a rock of offense. And he that believes in him shall not be confounded. (Rom. 9:32-33.)
The Hebrew text reads: "He that believes, let him not hasten."43
The discrepancy between the two versions can be straightened out in this way: One who believes in Christ is secure in his conscience; he is righteous and, as the Scripture says, "bold as a lion" (Prov.
28:1). And again: "Whatever shall befall the righteous shall not cause him anxiety" (Prov. 12:21), while "the wicked man flees
43 Isa. 28:16 (Vg.): "Qui crediderit, non festinet" when no man pursues" (Prov. 28:1)! And again (Isa. 57:20): "The wicked are like the raging sea which cannot rest/' "There is no peace to the wicked, says the Lord/' (Isa. 57:21.) And Ps. 1:4: "Not so the wicked: they are like the dust which the wind drives away."
Leviticus 26:36: "The sound of a flying leaf shall terrify them/'
And Isa. 3o:i5ff.: "Thus says the Lord God, the Holy One of Israel: If you return and be quiet, you shall be saved; in silence and in hope shall be your strength. And you would not. But you have said: No, but we will flee to horses; therefore shall you flee.
And we will mount upon the swift ones, and therefore shall they be swifter that shall pursue you. A thousand men shall flee for fear of one," etc.
All this means: One who believes in Christ does not hasten or flee; he is not frightened, because he fears nothing; he stands quiet and secure, founded upon a firm rock, according to the teaching of the Lord in Matt. 7:24. But one who does not believe in him will really "be in a hurry," i.e., he will flee, yet he will not be able to escape when tribulation and anxiety and, above all, the judgment of God assail him. For this is the punishment of the damned and the unending restlessness to which they are condemned that they flee from God and yet cannot escape him. This is also the state of every evil conscience that has forgotten Christ, according to Deut.
28:67: "In the morning you shall say: Who will grant me evening? and at evening: Who will grant me morning? for the tearfulness of your heart wherewith you shall be terrified." "For the Lord will give you a fearful heart and a soul consumed with longing." (Deut.
Such a horror and such a flight of the conscience that quickly wants to get away is the confusion of conscience. It is as Pliny says:44 "For no living being is fear more confusing than for man."
How aptly, therefore, our translation corresponds to the Septuagint!45 The Seventy say: "He shall not be confounded"; thereby they want to signify the confusion and disturbance of the conscience that result from terror and fear; then a man is incapable of orderly thought and planning; he only wants to get away from it all and yet cannot do so. It is just like the confusion that occurs in tumults of war: when fear and terror strike, everyone runs to and fro and is confounded. Such is the penalty of all who die or, rather, suffer outside Christ; they are so perturbed that they do not know what to do.
44 Pliny, Nat hist, VII, 5.
45 Cf. n. 43. Cf. Jerome, Comm. in Isaiam, 9, 28. Erasmus (in the Annot.) compares both versions. He himself makes the text read neither festinet nor confundeturj but "pudefiet" ("he will be ashamed").
LUTHER: LECTURES ON ROMANS Blessed Jerome,46 whom Lyra follows, says: "He does not hasten/' i.e., the Advent of the Lord does not seem near to him, just as, by contrast, the Thessalonians were upset and terrified as if the Day of the Lord would momentarily come (II Thess. 2:1 ff.).
In other words: one who believes in Christ is not so fearful that he thinks that the Day of Judgment has come whenever some kind of tribulation befalls him. But I do not understand this translation. Although I do not reject it, I do not want to take the time to discuss it further.
Still another interpretation is possible, one that I formerly used to advance, but it is a little too forced, namely: One who believes in Christ does not hasten with foolish zeal and does not walk about like the noonday devil47 in order to judge others and to excuse himself, but he is of a humble mind and teachable and willing to be led. For in the fervor of the novitiate many hasten toward heaven and toward righteousness and wisdom with an excessive, burning zeal. It is the devil who excites this in them, so that, exhausted from the first run, they afterward become useless, because their mind is full of disgust at every good effort and they have a lukewarm and languid attitude toward all that is good, because at the very start they spent themselves like water. Thus "the inheritance that is gotten hastily in the beginning, in the end shall be without a blessing." (Prov. 20:21.) And Blessed Augustine says in his book On the Blessed Life:48 "What one begins with too much eagerness commonly ends and gets lost in a great disgust."
Some, then, are quick and eager to judge others and to instruct them, demanding to be heard, but they are slow in letting themselves be judged and taught and they do not want to listen. But one who believes in Christ is not of this sort; he is like the one of whom Blessed James says: "Let every man be slow to speak but swift to hear" (James 1:19). The Jews, however, did not want to hear, because they hastened in their heart, etc.
The Greek equivalent of the word "confundetur" ("he shall be confounded") does not have this specifically Latin and proper meaning, suggesting, as was stated above, the sense of "confusion" or "being disturbed," etc., but "confundetur" is taken to mean
"he will be ashamed" or "he will blush with shame." In this case, the haste we have spoken of and this blushing with shame are
*6 Cf. Jerome and Lyra ad loc. v Cf. Ps. 90:5 f. (Vg.): "Thou shalt not be afraid of the terror of the night, of the arrow that flieth in the day, of the business that walks about in the dark, of invasion, or of the noonday devil." (The King James Version reads
[Ps. 91:6]: "Nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday.") 48 Not to be found in De beata vita or elsewhere in Augustine. brought into accord with one another in this way: one who is ashamed dreads to show himself; he wants to flee and to go into hiding. As the saying goes: "Fall upon us, mountains'* (Hos. 10:8;
Luke 23: 30). Thus his confusion causes him to hasten, i.e., to flee in fright. But one who believes in Christ does not do anything of this kind; he is not confounded and he does not blush with shame, because Christ has made him secure.
Either translation has, then, the same meaning, but the Septuagint expresses the cause and the Hebrew version49 the effect, as it is frequently the case also elsewhere. For upon being confounded and upon being put to shame, there follows hurried flight, because one dreads to be seen.
49 I.e., Jerome's correction of the Septuagint.