1. Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah.

1. Abraham took another wife, whose name was Keturah.

2. She bore him Zimran, Jokshan, Medan, Midian, Ishbak, and Shuah.

3. Jokshan was the father of Sheba and Dedan. The sons of Dedan were Asshurim, Letushim, 4. The sons of Midian were Ephah, Epher, Hanoch, Abida, and Eldaah. All these were the children of LET us bury the most saintly patriarch Abraham, whose example very much deserves to be preserved forever in the church of God. But this chapter presents a matter and a seemingly very bad example that gravely offends everybody. For Abraham, an old man, decrepit, near the grave, and altogether moribund, before whose eyes and mind there can be nothing more than death, marries a young girl and begets more children.

In the previous chapter Abraham concluded his span of life, drew up his testament, and made Isaac the heir of all his goods. Now however, after his son's wedding, he himself also takes a wife. It is not sufficiently evident what one's reaction should be, and I am altogether uncertain whether there is a hysteron proteron or, on the other hand, a proteron hysteron.1 But if we follow the order of the text, a strange question arises. Paul himself explains in Rom. 4:19 that "Abraham's body was as good as dead and unfit to procreate, because he was now 100 years old." Hence it seems somehow that this part of the chapter should have been inserted earlier and that Abraham married the girl Keturah before he begot Isaac. Perhaps it would be possible to answer that pressing question in this manner. But I am not making a positive statement.

For even though we assume that Abraham married Keturah after he had driven out Hagar, yet at that time he was not far from 100 years old; for Hagar gave birth to Ishmael when Abraham was 86 and Sarah 100 years old. Therefore this answer does not yet satisfy, but the question is still left in doubt.

But let us follow the familiar and common procedure in conformity with the description in the text.

Paul says that Abraham's body was as good as dead after he begot Isaac, and he is 140 years old when Isaac marries Rebecca. Perhaps one or two years intervened between his own marriage and that of his son. Therefore what answer should one give? Some maintain that Keturah is Hagar herself, whom he again received into favor after the death of his wife Sarah and later on took to wife, since she had now humbled herself and repented.2 This is a very fine thought. It abounds in kindheartedness, and I would gladly believe and agree that Abraham had taken Hagar and her son back into his home and had provided for her in this manner. But there is no certainty.

St. Jerome is greatly offended and would gladly speak irreverently of so great a man if he dared.

But he keeps his resentment in check and says: "The age of Abraham, who is now decrepit, seems to be a reason for excusing him, lest the old man be charged with having been lascivious because of his marriage after the death of his aged wife."3 But the most general opinion, of which Lyra, too, approves, is that Keturah is Hagar, although he sees that contrary to this the text states that gifts were given to the children of the concubines, of whom Hagar has to be one and Keturah has to be the other.4

It is my opinion that Keturah was not Hagar, and the reason that induces me most of all to hold to this view is to be found in the fact that the computation of the years does not agree with the notion that has been mentioned. For Hagar bore Ishmael when Abraham was 86, and she was married to him when she was about 30. Since her fifteenth year she had been reared by Sarah, who then took her into the house for the first time. There she remained until she was 30, when she became the mother of Ishmael. But Isaac is born 14 years after Ishmael's birth. When these years are added up, they make 44 years, or at least 40. To these should further be added the 40 years of Isaac, who marries Rebecca in his fortieth year. Consequently, Hagar's age adds up to 84 years, more or less, when she, too, in accordance with nature, had to be exhausted. And it is impossible to conclude that she bore six sons at that age.

Therefore I hold that Hagar cannot be Keturah, unless it is recorded by a hysteron proteron that Abraham took Keturah when, as has been related above, Hagar was joined to him. Furthermore, the text mentions concubines in the plural number. Consequently, Keturah is another woman. She is not - 153 Hagar. Besides, Abraham had two concubines: the one, who is called a mistress, in addition to his wife; the other, after his wife had died. Thus there still remains that very serious offense that Abraham,

140 years old, when his body was already as good as dead, married a young girl and begot six sons, although previously he had no offspring from Sarah except Isaac.

In the first place, one asks whether this was not impossible because Abraham's body was as good as dead. In the second place, one asks why offense was taken. To the first question I reply that old men can beget children and now and then are wont to do so. Therefore it was possible, even natural, for Abraham to beget children when he was 140 years old, because his was a healthy old age and not at all burdensome and annoying. Nor was he like our people, most of whom are completely exhausted when they have barely reached their fiftieth year. But he undoubtedly had a strong and vigorous body, just as today some men are so strong and healthy in their old age that they are able to bear huge burdens in managing a state or a household.

Furthermore, it is likely that God had given Abraham strength beyond what is natural and that he gained much vigor both of mind and body after the birth of Isaac, the son and heir of the promise.

The second question concerns the offense that is taken because Abraham marries a young girl.

Lyra advances this reason: that girls conceive more easily from old men than do women of a more advanced age.5 But the offense will be removed more properly if we distinguish the times and the customs of the fathers from the present times and customs. Many are offended by the fact that in this first book Moses relates so much about the procreation of the fathers.6 But they do not consider the difference in customs in different ages. At that time faith ruled in the fathers, and also faith in this article (Gen. 1:28): "Be fruitful and multiply." In our age, especially after those papistic monstrosities of celibacy, marriage has been deprived of its prestige and due honor, and true knowledge of the Word and ordinance of God has become extinct. Among the fathers this knowledge was pure and proper. For this reason they had a very high regard for the begetting of children.

Therefore one should not suppose that Abraham married Keturah because he was prompted by lasciviousness, for previously indeed, while the barren Sarah was living, he waited long enough for the blessing of God, and there was never any suspicion of lust in him. Therefore he did this because of his eager desire to obtain offspring, especially since he had heard in the promise (Gen. 17:4): "You shall be the father of many"—not only of Isaac but of many nations, through which God would multiply him not only spiritually but also physically.

Furthermore, Shem, Eber, and Shelah were still living. Abraham and Noah were contemporaries for 58 years. Noah heard Shem before and after the Flood. But Shem outlived Abraham by 31 years.

Hence it was a magnificent age, and it produced most illustrious men, none of whom would have permitted Abraham to perpetrate anything unseemly. Indeed, it seems that he did this at their bidding and at their advice. Others, who are indecent, do not have advisers and mentors of this kind. They are more like swine than like Abraham. Therefore they pursue in marriage a purpose different from what

Abraham sought. But one should not rush into it as such people and the papists also do. Their sole aim is lust, shamelessness, and the pleasure of the flesh, in which they are not only submerged but almost swallowed up.

Here, therefore, one must consider the time of the very saintly patriarchs, to whom Abraham undoubtedly listened. Thus there is a subsequent account of how Rebecca sought the advice of the patriarch Shem.7 Therefore it is an honorable marriage, and to it applies the statement in Mal. 2:15:

"And what does He desire? Godly offspring." Abraham was not a lustful old man; but whatever he did, he did because of his love and desire for offspring and at God's command, and finally at the advice and urging of the most saintly fathers, who said: "Marry a second wife, in order that your church may be extended and spread out over the world."

Jerome had the same thoughts I had when I was still a monk. But one should form a different opinion about such great men. They were most saintly, full of the Holy Spirit and faith; and they were directed by very great patriarchs, by Shem and the others. I am saying this in order to excuse the most saintly man Abraham, lest someone interpret this action of his as rashness, lasciviousness, or shamelessness and fail to realize that his obedience and his love for offspring led him to marry

- 154 Furthermore, God's special counsel is apparent in this passage. For the Holy Spirit, who is on the lookout for future errors and foresees them far in advance, is at pains to guard against them beforehand and to refute them, in order that the heretics who someday would condemn a second marriage may blush with shame. Jerome is one of these. He finds a second marriage so reprehensible that he regards it as adultery.8

In this passage, therefore, God has set before us an example and a striking evidence of His will. He does not condemn a second marriage that takes place after the first wife's death. Indeed, through His patriarch Shem He ordered the decrepit old man to take a wife.

And it seems that God wanted to teach and attest that the begetting of children is wonderfully pleasing to Him, in order that we might realize that He upholds and defends His Word when He says:

"Be fruitful." He is not hostile to children, as we are. Many of us do not seek to have offspring. But God emphasizes His Word to such an extent that He sometimes gives offspring even to those who do not desire it, yes, even hate it. Occasionally, of course, He does not give it to some who earnestly desire it. It is His purpose to test them. And, what is more, He seems to emphasize procreation to such an extent that children are born even to adulterers and fornicators contrary to their wish.

How great, therefore, the wickedness of human nature is! How many girls there are who prevent conception and kill and expel tender fetuses, although procreation is the work of God! Indeed, some spouses who marry and live together in a respectable manner have various ends in mind, but rarely children.

The first class of spouses consists of those who seek to have offspring and have a desire for this kind of life in order that they may become parents. Although original sin is there too, nevertheless procreation is the main cause. These people are really angels in comparison with the others, because they desire to make use of marriage for procreation. But their number is very small, and I simply count them among the angels and not among human beings. For it is a great gift of God if I look for and desire only offspring from a woman, especially if I am aware of the discomforts of marriage, of the vexing and the darts of the devil (Eph. 6:16). Such a man was Abraham, whom I count among the angelic husbands who desire "godly offspring," as Malachi (2:15) says.

The second class consists of those who marry for the sake of avoiding fornication. They do not turn away from or hate children, but it is their main purpose to live chastely and modestly. These, too, are pious people, but they are not on a par with the former. If God grants children, they are delighted.

They love their wives and their offspring, and they diligently perform the duties of their calling.

The third class consists of those who desire wives solely for the sake of pleasure. These are not concerned about children but want to lead a soft and pleasant life and to have a pretty girl to give them pleasure.

The fourth class consists of those who marry old ladies for the sake of wealth or honor. May God give them the cup of suffering, as Bernard says;9 for they seek only wealth and honor, not the begetting of children! Nevertheless, because of the respect for and the honor of marriage they should not be condemned.

But people must be diligently warned that such examples of the fathers should not be taken as a pattern to be imitated, since there is a great difference between Abraham's desire and that of an old woman who marries a young man. For although Abraham is under the sin of lust to the same extent as others are, he is nevertheless the master and not the slave of lust. Indeed, there is purity in him and sincere love for offspring. The love for offspring and seed prevails, just as among the heathen as well as among Christians many have for various reasons had an intense longing for children.

In the first place, therefore, I am of the opinion that Keturah is not Hagar. In the second place, I hold that Abraham should by no means be censured, but that the chasteness of his marriage should be discussed in the most respectable manner, and that the love he has for offspring should be commended because it increases the household, the state, and the church. But if in addition to this some weaknesses make their appearance at the same time; they are nevertheless not matters of primary importance.

I believe that Keturah was the daughter of some pious and faithful servant like Eliezar. She was not an Egyptian or a Canaanite. For the word has the same meaning as if one said "bound," "joined,"

- 155 or "associated"; for she was related to Abraham by affinity, either through his servants or from the family of Lot.

But why is Keturah called Abraham's wife in this passage, although it is stated later on that Abraham gave gifts to his concubines? If she was a concubine, why is she called his wife? Above there is a similar expression: "Sarah gave Hagar to Abram her husband as a wife" (Gen. 16:3). I am leaving the disputes about grammatical matters to the grammarians themselves. The Latins give the name pellex to a woman joined to a man who has a wife. They themselves had many pellices. A concubine is a woman whom an unmarried man has outside wedlock, with whom he has intercourse.

She is neither a pellex nor a wife. Augustine had such a concubine.10

But the times change laws and customs. Therefore one should note how in this passage and before the Law of Moses these terms must be distinguished, for there is a difference between wife and wife.

Abraham never had two wives. Lamech (Gen. 4:19) was the first to marry two women. Of Abraham, however, it is stated that he had only one wife. Yet there were two.

The term "wife," in only one meaning and in only one way, is applied to a woman who is free and who bears the heir of all goods. Such a one is Sarah. In another way a female slave who bears a child, but not an heir, is improperly called a wife. Later on Moses changed everything. Jacob had four wives, and the two female slaves or maids also gave birth to heirs.

Here a woman who is free and bears children is properly called a wife. A slave woman who bears children, but no heirs is also called a wife. Keturah is a wife. Nevertheless, she is a pellex, as is stated later in the text. And in 1 Chron. 1:32 the sons of Keturah, the י ֶל ֶגֶג ׁשפִִּּ of Abraham, that is, the concubine or pellex of Abraham, are enumerated. The Latin word is derived from the Hebrew.11 Thus that woman Keturah seems to have been a slave woman, because she is numbered among the concubines. She is not considered the lady of the house or as an heiress; she was taken only for the purpose of becoming the mother of offspring and bearing children. Such wives are not free or ladies of the house.

For the most part the names of Keturah's sons have disappeared. Midian was praised later in the Holy Scriptures; but the others vanished, and no mention is made of them. Thus Scripture indicates that the sons of the maidservant are servants who do not remain in the house. In Is. 60:6 mention is made of Midian and Ephah, who lived in Arabia Petraea toward Egypt and occupied a large part of Arabia Felix. Midian is situated toward the Red Sea. Ephah is part of Arabia Felix and got its name from that forefather.12

This, then, is the new and second marriage of the very saintly man Abraham. Concerning it one should note above all that God praises the work of procreation and counteracts the offense of the heretics who condemn a second marriage. For everything is recorded for the purpose of honoring and showing respect for marriage, in which God regards the offspring and then also chastity, the two adornments of marriage. For where children are brought into the world, there the highest blessing is; but if no offspring results, conjugal chastity should nevertheless be praised. This is profitable and necessary instruction over against the heretics who approve only of a first marriage or of one that is always fertile. They want like to be joined to like—an old man, for example, to an old woman. Let us pay heed to the two things I have mentioned and to whether a husband is content with his wife, of whatever kind she may be, and lives with her decently and chastely.

5. Abraham gave all he had to Isaac.

6. But to the sons of his concubines Abraham gave gifts; and while he was still living, he sent them away from his son Isaac, eastward to the east country.

The saintly father now bids the world farewell and makes his testament with a cheerful and serene heart, for to him death and life are alike. This example teaches us that we should take care diligently that our passing out of this life is serene and in peace, lest opportunities and seeds for disputes, quarrels, and disagreements about our fortune and possessions be left behind. But while the father is still living, the children or heirs should be informed how much will be coming to each one according to the wish of the testator or according to the laws.

Thus Abraham dismisses the sons of the concubines with his gifts and sends them away to the Orient. Some reached India, but the names that are mentioned here are those of Arabia Petraea and - 156 Arabia Felix. Abraham sends them into that waste and still uncultivated place after he has bestowed on each one his gift. But he appoints Isaac as the sole heir.

This, too, should be noted on account of the heretics who either confuse or condemn these duties of everyday life. While Abraham was alive, he made these arrangements with the good intention that after his death no occasion for quarreling should remain.

Moreover, Abraham has shown us, too, very many most excellent kindnesses; for from him we have the entire Holy Scripture. Indeed, in the beginning Adam transmitted to the patriarch Noah the doctrine of God and of the true forms of worship by word of mouth. Noah then transmitted this to Abraham as if from hand to hand. But I think that Abraham composed a little book or a brief account from Adam up to his own times. Finally, when he has left behind his son Isaac, from whom Christ would be born, and then a well-established church and household, he departs this life and bids the world farewell.

7. These are the days of the years of Abraham's life, a hundred and seventy-five years.

8. Abraham breathed his last and died at a good old age, an old man and full of years, and was gathered to his people.

9. Isaac and Ishmael, his sons, buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron, the son of Zohar the Hittite, east of Mamre,

10. the field which Abraham purchased from the Hittites. There Abraham was buried, with Sarah, his wife.

Abraham sojourned for 100 years in the land of Canaan after he had gone out from Ur of Chaldeans when he was 75 years old. But what the Lord said to Abraham above (Gen. 15:15)—"As for yourself, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age"—is recorded in this passage as having been fulfilled. He breathed his last. He departed. Nevertheless, he died. This is intended to comfort us, for it was not written for the sake of oxen or other irrational creatures.

Abraham departed like any other human being, and Moses says that he died. Such a great man, a man abounding in all virtues, the father of the promise, of faith, of the children of God, and of all nations— this man dies just as we do; but he dies in a pleasant and agreeable old age, an old man and full of years.

In all Holy Scripture this is the first passage which declares that the death of the saints is peaceful and precious in the sight of God (Ps. 116:15) and that the saints do not taste death but most pleasantly fall asleep. Isaiah read and carefully expounded this passage, for from it there originated those striking statements he made: "The righteous man is taken away from calamity, he enters into peace; they rest in their beds" (57:1–2)13 and "Come, my people, enter your chambers, and shut your doors behind you; hide yourselves for a little while until the wrath is past" (26:20).

In the eyes of the world the righteous are despised, spurned, and thrust aside. Their death seems exceedingly sad. But they are sleeping a most pleasant sleep. When they lie down in their beds and breathe their last, they die just as if sleep were gradually falling upon their limbs and senses. For previously they have been humbled by various trials, and they have become peaceful and quiet, so that they say: "Lord God, I shall die gladly if this seems best to Thee." They do not dread death as do the ungodly, who tremble and are horribly afraid. This they do to awaken us, in order that we may learn to obey God when He calls us out of this wretched state and may be able to say: "I do not want one hour to be added to my life, Lord Jesus Christ. Come when Thou wilt." In this way Abraham dies full of days, when he was well content.14

But where did Abraham go? Moses says: "He was gathered to his people." Do people, then, still remain after this life? For the words sound as though he had gone from one people to another or from one city to another. This is truly an outstanding and notable evidence of the resurrection and the future life. It should be set forth for the comfort of all who believe in God. Although more excellent and clearer evidences are presented to us in the New Testament, it is nevertheless worthwhile to see what the saintly fathers in the Old Testament had and believed.

We have the grace and the gift. In addition, we have a clear and extensive knowledge about death and life, since we are sure that our Savior Christ Jesus is sitting at the right hand of God the Father and is waiting for us when we depart this life. Therefore when we depart from the living, we go forth to the (guardian of our souls (1 Peter 2:25), who receives us into His hands. He is our Abraham in whose embrace we take delight. He lives. Indeed, He rules forever.

About the fathers one must speak in a different manner, and our comfort is far more glorious and far greater, although they had the same evidence and solace concerning eternal life and the resurrection of the dead. Thus Moses attests in this passage that Abraham was gathered to his people.

Above (Gen. 15:15) Abraham heard in the promise that he would go to his fathers. And these two are the first passages in all Holy Scripture that speak of the dead after this life. In the fifth chapter the statement "He died" is made about all except about Enoch alone (v. 24), who was translated by the Lord. Concerning Abraham it is stated that he would go to his fathers and that he was gathered to his people.

These words of the Holy Spirit are by no means useless. Nor are they spoken to beasts, which do not go to their fathers and their people. No, they are spoken to human beings, and they bear witness that after this life another and better life remains, yes, that even before the coming of Christ there was a people of the living which dwelt in the land of the living. To them the godly went away. Therefore from then on the fathers had an understanding of the resurrection and of eternal life, and the words of each passage are used in their proper and clear sense. "You will be gathered to the rest of the saints," they say, "who have died before you. Therefore the fathers are living and are a people." This is not said about the ungodly, but the discussion is about the righteous and the saints.

In the Books of Kings (1 Kings 2:2) David makes use of another figure when he says: "Behold, I am about to go the way of all the earth." But later on Moses retains the same expression in connection with Ishmael, Isaac, and Jacob: "He breathed his last and was gathered to his people." Therefore the fathers concluded from these passages that another life remains and that the saints do not perish like cattle but are gathered to the people in the land of the living. And this is the reason why they are buried by their sons with such respect and honor—which it is not customary to do in the case of beasts

—doubtless because of the certain expectation of another life.

Accordingly this serves to comfort us, lest we, like others, who have no hope (1 Thess. 4:13), be frightened by or shudder at death. For in Christ death is not bitter, as it is for the ungodly, but it is a change of this wretched and unhappy life into a life that is quiet and blessed. This statement should convince us fully that we do not pass from a pleasant life into a life that is unhappy, but that we pass from afflictions into tranquillity. For since the fathers had this comfort from these few passages long before Christ, how much more reasonable it is for us to guard and preserve the same comfort! We have it in far greater abundance.

Later on, in the Gospel, Christ called the place into which Lazarus and all the other saints have been gathered the bosom of Abraham (Luke 16:22). But how to explain or define this I leave to the judgment of anybody in accordance with each one's understanding. Nor shall I make positive statement, since even Augustine says that he does not know.15 But we are not doing the right thing if we retain "the bosom of Abraham" in the New Testament. For just as before Abraham's death there was no bosom of Abraham, so there is no longer a bosom of Abraham after Christ's coming.

Consequently, I am not making a bosom of Abraham at this time. Nor do I think that there is any place where Abraham embraces us on his lap, so to speak. But the bosom of Abraham where he holds and has embraced all the saints who died up to the death of Christ is the promise made to Abraham (Gen.

22:18): "In your Seed all the nations shall be blessed." Thus the bosom of Adam was the promise given in Paradise (Gen. 3:15): "The Seed of the woman shall crush the head of the serpent"; and those who departed with faith in that promise were saved, because the Word of God is greater and more extensive than heaven and earth.

Therefore the bosom of Abraham is the promise concerning the Christ who would come; and the father of this promise is Abraham. But today it is changed to the Word concerning the Christ who has been manifested in the flesh; and he who would believe otherwise would be a Jew and condemned, because Abraham's bosom was done away with after the resurrection of Christ, and a better bosom, namely, that of Christ, has taken its place. For when we depart this life, we are carried into the bosom of Christ. And just as the fathers died in faith in the Christ who would come and were thus gathered into Abraham's bosom, that is, in the expectation of the future Savior, so we must die in faith in Christ, the Savior who has appeared; and after this life we are gathered into the bosom of the Christ

- 158 who was born, suffered, was crucified, and rose again for us. We are not worried at all anymore about Furthermore, at this point one can be concerned about the state of the souls after this life. The body is destroyed by putrefaction and worms. But what, it is asked, becomes of the soul before that Day of Judgment? I am touching on this controversy, of course, in order to forestall and put an end to the prying questions and discussions of others. But the answer which Christ prescribes is simple when He says in Matt. 22:32: "God is not God of the dead, but of the living." This makes us sure that our souls are living and are sleeping in peace, and that they are not being racked by any tortures.

And many passages of Holy Scripture confirm that we do not die after death but are plainly alive, as very clear statements from the Book of Isaiah (57:1–2) prove: "Devout men are taken away while no one understands. For the righteous man is taken away from calamity; he enters into peace; they rest in their beds." These are most extraordinary words. They clearly indicate the state and condition of the dead after this life. "They enter," he says, "not into death, purgatory, or hell; they enter into peace."

And it is a great comfort when he says that the righteous are called away before calamity comes. Thus we ourselves shall die in peace before evil and calamity come over Germany.

Consequently, the testimonies of the prophet are in agreement with that passage of Genesis where Moses says that Abraham was gathered to his people; and we should have no doubt about the importance of these testimonies, for Holy Scripture does not lie or deceive. The saints repose gently and peacefully, just as in the Book of Revelation (14:13) the voice from heaven bears witness to this:

"Henceforth, says the Spirit, that they may rest from their labors."

At that time this rest was called the bosom of Abraham; and from the beginning, before Abraham, it was called the bosom of Adam. For the saints who believed the promise concerning Christ died in such a manner that after they had been called away from the troubles and hardships of this life, they entered their chamber, slept there, and rested in peace. This is true and clear. It is in agreement with Scripture and the statement of Christ (Matt. 22:32) that God is not God of the dead but of the living.

But now another question arises. Since it is certain that the souls are living and are in peace, what kind of life or rest is this? But this question is too lofty and too difficult for us to be able to define it.

For God did not want us to know this in this life. Thus it is enough for us to know that souls do not go out of their bodies into the danger of tortures16 and punishments of hell, but that there is ready for them a chamber in which they may sleep in peace.

Nevertheless, there is a difference between the sleep or rest of this life and that of the future life.

For toward night a person who has become exhausted by his daily labor in this life enters into his chamber in peace, as it were, to sleep there; and during this night he enjoys rest and has no knowledge whatever of any evil caused either by fire or by murder. But the soul does not sleep in the same manner. It is awake. It experiences visions and the discourses of the angels and of God. Therefore the sleep in the future life is deeper than it is in this life. Nevertheless, the soul lives before God. With this analogy, which I have from the sleep of a living person, I am satisfied; for in him there is peace and quiet. He thinks that he has slept barely one or two hours, and yet he sees that the soul sleeps in such a manner that it also is awake.

Thus after death the soul enters its chamber and is at peace; and while it sleeps, it is not aware of its sleep. Nevertheless, God preserves the waking soul. Thus God is able to awaken Elijah, Moses, etc., and so to control them that they live. But how? We do not know. The resemblance to physical sleep—namely, that God declares that there is sleep, rest, and peace—is enough. He who sleeps a natural sleep has no knowledge of the things that are happening in his neighbor's house. Nevertheless, he is alive, even though, contrary to the nature of life, he feels nothing in his sleep. The same thing will happen in that life, but in a different and better way.

Just as a mother brings an infant into the bedchamber and puts it into a cradle—not that it may die, but that it may have a pleasant sleep and rest—so before the coming of Christ and much more after the coming of Christ all the souls of believers have entered and are entering the bosom of Christ.

There have also been discussions about where the souls are. In his Enchiridion to Laurence Augustine states that their whereabouts is concealed. He says: "But the time that elapses between man's death and the final resurrection keeps the souls in hidden places, inasmuch as each one deserves either rest or distress, depending on what its lot was in the flesh while it was living."17

- 159 Here one discovers the weakness of the human intellect. But one must consider the Word and the omnipotence of God; for if God weighs heaven and earth with three fingers, as is stated in Is. 40:12,

His Word is surely far greater and far more extensive. Therefore the whereabouts of the souls is the Word of God or the promises in which we fall asleep. To be sure, it appears to be of no consequence and feeble when it is uttered through the mouth of man; but when we take hold of it in faith and fall asleep in the Word, the soul comes into infinite space.

I have said this in order to curb unprofitable and idle thoughts about these questions. For it is more than enough to know that we depart safely and quietly into the bosom of Christ; that is, that those who rely on the Word and the promise escape afflictions and tribulations and enjoy everlasting peace and safety, in accordance with Christ's statement in John 8:51: "Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps

My Word, he will never see death." Consequently, he will live in an eternal life.

But here one must also censure the foolishness of the papists, who have devised five places after death: (1) the hell of the damned; (2) the hell of infants who were not baptized; (3) purgatory; (4) the limbo of the fathers (in the New Testament they added Paradise on account of Christ's statement in Luke 23:43: "Today you will be with Me in Paradise"); and (5) the open heaven.18

They say that the first place, which is torment by eternal fire, is for the damned. But whether the souls of the ungodly are tortured immediately after death I am unable to affirm, although the example of the rich glutton applies here. But there is a passage to the opposite effect in 2 Peter 2:4. It deals with the wicked angels who are being kept until the judgment. And in 2 Cor. 5:10 Paul says: "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what he has done in the body." It seems that they, too, are sleeping and resting; but I am making no positive statement.

The second place is that of infants who were not baptized. They maintain that while those infants are damned, they are not suffering punishment by fire or by worms but are merely without the vision of God. They do not have the light which would enable them to see God and the angels. Nevertheless, they are not tormented.

The third sphere is that of purgatory, into which neither the damned nor infants enter; it is for those who, while they believe, yet have not rendered satisfaction for their sins. The souls of these are ransomed by means of indulgences. From this source comes the hogwash of indulgences and the entire papistic religion.

The fourth place is the limbo of the fathers. They say that Christ descended to this place, broke it open, and set free—not from hell but from the limbo—the fathers who were troubled by the longing and waiting for Christ but were not enduring punishment or torments.

With these silly ideas the papists have filled the church and the world. We have overturned all this completely and maintain that unbaptized infants do not have such a sphere. But in what state they are or what becomes of them we commend to the goodness of God. They do not have faith or Baptism; but whether God receives them in an extraordinary manner and gives them faith is not stated in the Word, and we dare not set down anything as certain. To be deprived of the vision of God is hell itself.

They admit that they have will and intellect, especially concerning the vision of God and life; but these are falsehoods. And purgatory is the greatest falsehood, because it is based on ungodliness and unbelief; for they deny that faith saves, and they maintain that satisfaction for sins is the cause of salvation. Therefore he who is in purgatory is in hell itself; for these are his thoughts: "I am a sinner and must render satisfaction for my sins; therefore I shall make a will and shall bequeath a definite amount of money for building churches and for buying prayers and sacrifices for the dead by the monks and priests." Such people die in a faith in works and have no knowledge of Christ. Indeed, they hate Him. We die in faith in Christ, who died for our sins and rendered satisfaction for us. He is my

Bosom, my Paradise, my Comfort, and my Hope.

Their talk about a limbo of the fathers is inappropriate. It would have been better if they had called it the bosom of Abraham; for those who died before Christ were saved in the promise of the Word in which they lived in this life, and when they died, they entered into life and were truly alive.

The meaning of the words of Christ to the criminal (Luke 23:43) is this: "Today you will be with Me in Paradise"; that is, in My bosom; where I am, you likewise shall be. There heaven and Paradise are the same thing, except that as yet there is rest and peace among the saints, but not the kingdom.

- 160 Christ is in heaven or Paradise to direct, judge, and rule His church, to send angels to minister to His church, to distribute gifts to men, to exalt the humble, etc. For He is always working and does not rest as do the saints who sleep, about whom it is stated in Is. 63:16: "Abraham does not know us, and Israel does not acknowledge us."

Therefore there is a great difference between the sleeping saints and the ruling Christ. The former sleep and do not know what is going on. Nevertheless, they are resting. But when the ungodly die, whether they have departed long ago, before the coming of Christ, or today, after Christ has been revealed, they go simply to damnation. But we do not know whether their damnation begins immediately after death; for it is written (Rom. 14:10) that all will have to stand before the judgment seat, and John 5:29 states: "Those who have done good will come forth to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of judgment."

Accordingly, we should remember that after Christ the bosom of Abraham has come to an end and that all the promises about the coming Seed have been fulfilled. We have other and far more glorious promises that were given us by the Son of God, who became incarnate, suffered, and was raised again.

If we do not believe these, we are condemned forever. But I am unable to say positively in what state those are who are condemned in the New Testament. I leave this undecided. Concerning the godly it is most certain that they live and enter into peace. About this matter we indeed have far more and far clearer examples and evidences in the New Testament from the addresses of Christ and of the apostles than did the fathers, who had only a few passages which clearly indicated the resurrection and eternal life. The passages in The Wisdom of Solomon (3:1)—"The souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and no torment of death will touch them"—was taken from Isaiah.

But this faith—both that of the fathers and our own—is one and the same, namely, that there remains another and better life after this one. It would be most shameful indeed for Christians to have any doubt concerning it when they have such great light. Let us, therefore, receive and with firm assent of the heart preserve this doctrine which has been revealed to us through God's boundless favor by means of many clear evidences. For a most pestilential age is now arising, and the Epicureans are increasing in number. This is most certain proof of the confusion of everything and of the approaching judgment. For if I do not believe in a future life and a resurrection, why do I have need of God and a knowledge of Christ? Or how can I maintain that there is a God who punishes the wicked and does good to the pious? The denial of a future life completely does away with God, and thus we shall be altogether like horses and mules (Ps. 32:9), which do not trouble themselves at all either about death or about life. And this can surely be observed in the case of the Epicureans. Whatever they hear about God, either when He is promising or when He is threatening, is now ridiculous to them and an empty tale. But let us Christians shun that horrible smugness, and let us firmly hold fast to the evidences of eternal life and of the resurrection that have been handed down from the beginning of the world.

Moses describes the death of Abraham with two words, both of which mean "to die." "He breathed his last, or departed," he says, "and died." Above (Gen. 7:21) we read about the Flood that all flesh departed, or died, whether it lived in the water or on land. There Moses employed the first word: עוַַגָּ.

Below (Gen. 49:33), in the account of Jacob only the other word appears: "He breathed his last and was gathered to his people." But here Moses combines the two words, and I think that this is the difference: With the first word he wanted to point out the well-known demeanor or agony of a dying person, as though he were saying: "He became sick, lay down, and was at the point of death, so that no hope of life remained. Nevertheless, he was not yet dead." Therefore I explain the former as the imperfect tense but the latter as the perfect: Abraham was dying, and he died; that is, he was struggling with death and was at the point of death; then he died and passed over into eternal life.

These facts are related by Moses so carefully for our comfort, in order that we may know that Abraham departed this life in the manner of other human beings and that he did not have any particular advantage over others but underwent the death that is common to all men. Since this is said about those most excellent and most saintly men, we, too, should bear calmly the common lot of mortals and should prepare ourselves with the same patience, faith, and hope of a better life for our departure from the troubles of the present life and for our future immortality.

- 161 Now, therefore, we have buried the saintly patriarch Abraham, and it is most beneficial that his memory be in honor and remain in the church on account of the promise concerning the coming Seed

—the promise which was repeated and explained—and on account of the faith of Abraham himself and the various most excellent examples of his very many virtues. And may Christ—the Son of God, who sits at the right hand of the Father and gives gifts to men (Eph. 4:8) that they may gather and preserve a church for Him—may Christ grant that we may be able to remember gratefully, to follow, and to imitate all these. To Him be praise and honor with the Father and the Holy Spirit forever.

Up to this point we have expounded three books of Genesis as we divided it above.20 The first presents the account of Adam, our first parent. The second praises Noah, the preacher of righteousness, and tells about the horrible punishment of the Flood, by which the original world was destroyed. Noah alone, together with his family, was saved. The third is devoted to Abraham, whose history is memorable above all because of the repeated promise concerning the Seed who would bless all nations, and because of various examples of faith and other virtues. And surely if someone thinks this over carefully, he will understand that it is a great and indescribable kindness of God that the accounts of such great men have been related in the Holy Scriptures and in records and have been preserved to this day. For the writings of the heathen have no knowledge at all of these accounts. The church alone enjoys this blessing and has the sure knowledge and divine evidence about the true beginnings and the wonderful dissemination of the doctrine which the church itself preserves, which in the beginning God gave with His own voice to our first parents, and the profession and evidences of which He wanted to exist in that entire succession of fathers.

Therefore God's voice from time to time repeats and renews the promise which in the beginning was heard in Paradise and later on was repeated and elucidated to Abraham. Nevertheless, God speaks less frequently with Isaac and Jacob than he did with Abraham; for they knew that it was necessary for them to keep His promise and Abraham's faith in mind. Yet as often as the faith of the most saintly patriarchs is in danger in their trials, God encourages and strengthens them again, in order that they may not succumb in the perils and difficulties they encounter. For we shall see astonishing conflicts and very severe tribulations in the life of both patriarchs—conflicts and tribulations through which they are led and preserved by God without any human help.

Irreligious people have no understanding of these matters, and when they read that Isaac or Jacob roamed about like vagabonds without fixed abodes, that they were men in private life, and that they busied themselves with household and mental activities, they laugh inordinately at these matters and give vent to contempt. For in keeping with the judgment, the wisdom, or the diligence of reason, they see no extraordinary or heroic accomplishment at all like the many things they read about with admiration in the historical accounts of the heathen. But they disdain these accounts of the fathers because they do not see the true adornments of these stories. They do not see the outstanding gift of the Word of God. Nor do they see the faith, the prayer, and the patience in misfortunes through which the saints overcame the world and the snares of Satan. These conflicts and victories surpass to the highest degree all the deeds and triumphs of all heroes.

Therefore he who wants to read about these matters with profit should be convinced that Holy Scripture is divine wisdom, not the wisdom of men. Then he will feel his heart being kindled by a marvelous love and desire for the things Scripture contains. For it is a well of such a kind that the more one draws and drinks from it, the more one thirsts for it, as Ecclesiasticus says (24:21, 20): "Those who eat me will hunger for more, and those who drink me will thirst for more. For my spirit is sweeter than honey, and my inheritance sweeter than the honeycomb"; for in that book are treated "things into which angels long to look," as 1 Peter 1:12 states. But these things are hidden from the eyes of those who are wise according to the flesh; they are manifest only to the spirit.

At this point we shall begin the fourth book; for even though the Hebrews joined this little section about Ishmael and Isaac to the history of Abraham, it is readily apparent that after Ishmael and Isaac had buried their father Abraham, Moses then wanted to begin a new book about the patriarch Isaac.

THE SECOND PART OF CHAPTER TWENTY-FIVE 11. After the death of Abraham, God blessed Isaac his son. And Isaac dwelt at Beer-lahai-roi.

- 162 Moses begins a brief narrative about Isaac. He says that God blessed Isaac after the death of his father. But he soon breaks off, and in few words he completes what there is still to say about Ishmael.

But he does not speak of the blessing until the proper time for this has come. For it was delayed 20 years, during which Isaac lived with his wife Rebecca without offspring. Nor was he able to become a father through his natural powers, but he obtained progeny from God through his entreaties and his humble prayer.

But this is an amazing situation if you compare it with what precedes. The servant made use of a great display when he obtained the girl for Isaac, and by divine dispensation Isaac was united with her in such great hope and expectation that it seemed that she would be the mother of countless sons. For why would Isaac not entertain this hope when his wife was led to him by God's predestination, by a most saintly father, by a most faithful helper, and finally with the assistance of an angel? Nevertheless, he has a childless Rebecca for 20 years. Furthermore, his father was still living, and undoubtedly both sighed and prayed anxiously for offspring. And I am not sure whether this was not the reason why

Abraham married Keturah, since he saw that in Isaac's case the seed was being delayed. But I shall make no positive statement. Those men, who were so saintly and were trained by various trials, were accustomed by long experience to wait for the hand of the Lord. They have been presented to us by God as an example of the true worship of God, which consists mainly and really, not in outward sacrifices or works but in faith, hope, and love of God.

Reason dreams that God has to be worshiped and appeased with physical sacrifices or other exercises devised by men. But the examples of the fathers show that the foremost and best worship is to wait for God. And this is the real benefit and the most appropriate exercise of faith. For faith first carries us away into things that are invisible when it points out that things that are not apparent to the eye must be accepted. This we can somehow bear and put up with. The heart, however, is not only led into what is invisible; but it is also kept in suspense and is put off for a long time, just as Abraham, as has been stated above, waited for 25 years before a son was born to him, and Isaac is without offspring for 20 years. But the third and by far the most serious thing is experienced when delay and postponement are followed by a disposition to the opposite effect. It is then that he who is able to endure and wait, to hope for the things that are being delayed, and to be pleased with what is contrary, will eventually learn from experience that God is truthful and keeps His promises.

But these are not works of the flesh, of human reason, or of monks and hypocrites, for whom every delay is too long and irksome. For they desire to get at once what they are asking for. They trust God only with regard to things that are at hand, not with regard to those things for which one still waits with uncertainty. But God wants His promises to be invisible and contradictory, in order that we may be put to the test and exercised, and may learn that waiting is true worship and is most pleasing to God. Consequently, those well-known admonitions in the psalms are so common, such as "Wait for the Lord; be strong" (27:14), etc. And the prophets constantly impress the same thing: "Wait, believe."

But these words are laughed at by the irreligious. Thus their mockery is mentioned in Is. 28:13:

"Command, command again; wait, wait again; here a little, there a little." In this way they derided the doctrine and the comforts pertaining to faith and patience as vain and uncertain. Nevertheless, it is certain that when we begin to pray and to be confident, at that very time that which is asked for or promised is actually and immediately prepared and at hand, in accord with the statement (Is. 65:24):

"Before they call, I will answer; while they are yet speaking, I will hear."

This is indeed most certain and true. But when the human heart is in a trial and in danger, it finds it difficult to be satisfied with this comfort; for it is in the habit of constantly torturing itself and complaining: "What will happen? When will it happen? Where will it happen?" Therefore my answer is: "Wait, wait." But if the waiting continues to be prolonged and the heart again asks when it will finally happen, you should say: "I have no other advice to give than that you bear it and continue to wait one, two, or three years. He will surely come and will not tarry."

For this is true, and it is customary for God to tarry, to delay and defer His help, but in such a way that He comes when it is necessary, and comes quickly, as is evident in the wonderful deliverance of the people of Israel when they were led out of Egypt. The people had waited for a long time while they were oppressed by burdensome servitude and while the Lord tarried. But after they had been brought into the utmost danger—into danger involving life and death—and the prospect of immediate

- 163 destruction was apparent on one side and on the other, the Lord then said to Moses (Ex. 14:15): "Why do you cry this way?" And suddenly the deliverance and the great deeds of the Lord are shown. But as long as an extreme need and a difficulty beyond human counsel are not insistent in their demands, He delays His action and help.

These very noble examples are presented to us in the saintly men in order that we may learn that the main and spiritual worship of God does not consist in building temples and proliferating ceremonies. All these are childish amusements through which God attracts and invites us to Himself, as He used to exercise the Jews by means of various rites and by a kind of pedagogy, as it were. But the worship of the fathers is a waiting. Thus Job says: "Though He slays me, yet will I trust in Him."

And below (Gen. 32:26 ff.), when Jacob wrestles with the angel, he firmly and with a steadfast heart holds fast to the promise; but it is delayed, and his faith is shaken in a variety of ways. Nevertheless, his sentiment is this: "I believe that the promise is true. If it is not fulfilled at once, I nevertheless have hope. Even if He wrestles with me, I shall nevertheless love Him." Sacrifices of this kind give off a very pleasant odor in the sight of God, and they eventually gladden the heart of man with lasting happiness and joy. On the other hand, those who lose courage because of despair and fall away deprive themselves of eternal welfare, as Sirach says (Ecclus. 2:16): "Woe to those who have lost patience."

But he who endures and retains his trust and expectation overcomes and triumphs. Thus Noah waited 120 years and meanwhile endured the jibes and the ridicule of the ungodly. Eventually, however, the entire world was submerged; but he himself and his house were miraculously preserved, and he became a father of righteousness.

Consequently, God must be worshiped with faith, hope, and love. Outward ceremonies are merely exercises for the unlearned by means of which they are accustomed to the far loftier duties of godliness, just as infants are first nourished with milk and softer food. But we who govern and teach others should learn that the true worship of God does not consist in sacrificing cattle, etc., but in holding fast to His promise and believing that it is true and unfailing. This trust is followed by the hope which reminds me that I should wait and that I have a gracious God. But if I endure in trouble, then Pharaoh and his troops are plunged into the deep, and the way out I have hoped for is opened to me.

Accordingly, Moses breaks off the narrative he had begun concerning the blessing of Isaac. For when he says that God blessed Isaac, one must understand this in faith and hope, since so far the opposite was evident, and Isaac was waiting for offspring during the entire 20 years. Indeed, the vigor of his age, of his nature, and of his strength was not lacking. Rebecca was a beautiful young girl.

Because of her age she was able to be fruitful and to bear children. Nevertheless, the promise continued to be delayed; it remained invisible until they were almost 60 years old and definite danger of infertility was now threatening. Then Isaac undoubtedly recalled the anxiety of his own parents in the same danger of infertility and thought: "Behold, my Rebecca and I are experiencing the same trial and misfortune that previously afflicted my parents Abraham and Sarah, because everything seems to be opposed to and in conflict with the promise" Nevertheless, he decided that he should cling to it firmly, in accordance with his father's example. But this happens in order that God may call into existence the things that do not exist (Rom. 4:17). Thus today the Turk and the pope are raging against us with inhuman hatred and ferocity. Inside, however their consciences are disturbed in various ways; they are wrestling with fear, a lack of confidence, and the terrors of sin. Against all this, of course, we have most powerful consolations: the promise of the Word, Baptism, and the Eucharist, which should be apprehended and held fast with strong faith. But I do not see the forgiveness of sins, eternal salvation, and life. Yet I believe, and I am sustained by hope. And if faith is shaken and weakened either by temptation or by a fall and human frailty, nevertheless I hold fast to the Keys and cling to the promise of God, even if heaven falls. This is worshiping God and fulfilling the First Commandment, the usefulness of which is not perceived until there are trials, when the promise is invisible. I am put off for a long time, and eventually the situation is turned into the opposite.

The devil operates with another rule—a rule that is the opposite of this one. For he is in the habit of being at hand immediately when his priests and prophets want him, and he does not delay what they ask for. Thus sudden storms and thunderclaps are frequently caused by sorcerers.21 In this manner the devil deludes and ensnares people. Consequently, they serve him gladly, because he helps and listens

- 164 to them promptly; and, what is worse, it is decided that this is done by God. Therefore this difference in the ways in which God and Satan operate should be carefully noted. God wants us to wait, as Ps.

130:5 says: "My soul waits, and in His Word I hope." If you want to serve God, you must believe things that are invisible, hope for things that are delayed, and love God—even if He shows Himself unfriendly and opposed to you—and thus persevere until the end. This is what Moses means when he calls giving a wife to Isaac and not giving children a blessing. Isaac prayed for a wife in order to beget offspring. He got his wish, but he waits for 90 years without offspring, as his father Abraham waited just as many years until Ishmael was born. Yet this was not the promised offspring, and the son from Sarah had to be hoped for and waited for much longer.

The Well of the Living and the Seeing has been spoken of above.22 When Hagar fled from her mistress Sarah, she wandered about in the wilderness of Beer-sheba toward Egypt, and there she gave the name to the well, in order that among all succeeding generations Hagar might be praised as an outstanding lady and matron, from whom the well had received its name; for she said (Gen. 16:13):

"Surely, here I have seen the back parts of Him who sees me." Isaac regarded this as conferring glory upon himself, even though Hagar was his stepmother; and for this reason he dwelt near the Well of the Living and the Seeing. But now Moses will bring the account of Ishmael to a conclusion.

12. These are the descendants of Ishmael, Abraham's son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah's maid, bore to Abraham.

13. These are the names of the sons of Ishmael, named in the order of their birth: Nebaioth, the firstborn of Ishmael; and Kedar, Adbeel, Mibsam,

14. Mishma, Dumah, Massa, 15. Hadad, Tema, Jetur, Naphish, and Kedemah.

16. These are the sons of Ishmael, and these are their names, by their villages and by their encampments, twelve princes according to their tribes.

Moses' description of Ishmael is altogether different from the one he gives of Isaac, of whom he said that God blessed him. Yet he did not express the blessing. But above (Gen. 21:11 ff.) we heard the very sad decision concerning Ishmael, namely, that in spite of the grief and the reluctance of his father he was cast out of the house, not only in accord with his mother's win but also in accord with the will of God, and was called an offspring of the flesh and not of the promise. These are very hard and bitter facts. But in this passage he is being praised not only because of the carnal blessing but also because of the blessing that is spiritual. In the carnal blessing, of course, he was superior to his brother Isaac.

This situation made the trial and anxiety of Isaac worse. For as yet he has no offspring. For many years he has been waiting for the blessing, but sons are not born to him until he is 80 years old. Meanwhile

12 princes are bestowed on Ishmael long before Isaac begets children. Yet neither Isaac nor Abraham begot so many princes. But Ishmael, who is the brother born of a slave woman, is honored by a blessing so great and glorious that in a short time he begets 12 princes, and both Abraham and Isaac saw that all these were living and flourishing. For Ishmael died 48 years after Abraham, and the sons of Ishmael developed at once into great men and princes before the blessing promised to Abraham and This was surely a severe trial for faith, hope, and love. Would these things not try a heart, no matter how godly and saintly it might be? Above all, however, they try the heart of Isaac, who believed God and heard himself preferred to all nations and to his brother Ishmael. For it was stated:

"In Isaac, not in Ishmael, shall your Seed be named -the Seed in whom the entire world will be blessed." God also blessed Ishmael when He said (Gen. 17:20): "He will become a great nation and will be the father of 12 princes." But this is nothing in comparison with the promised Seed. Here, however, everything seems to be changed and turned around. Isaac, who has the true promise, is put after Ishmael; and although the latter has only a carnal promise, he goes very far ahead and becomes a lord of lords. He has 12 princes, while Isaac lives alone and without offspring at Beer-sheba like a block of wood and a log. Consequently, he thought: "O God, is this Thy promise? Is this Thy truth?"

Thoughts of this kind were very sharp incentives for doubt and mistrust. Thus Job's wife reproaches her husband. "Where is your godliness now?" she asks. "Do you still hold fast your integrity? Curse

God, and die." (Job 2:9.) Surely the same thing could have been said to Isaac. For he who was - 165 previously despised and cast out of the house gets a far richer blessing from God than either Isaac or Therefore these are strange accounts and the cause of very great offenses to carnal-minded people; for all the works of God are in conflict with His promise, which nevertheless remains completely true and unshaken. But what offends is the fact that it is invisible, delayed, and turned into its opposite.

The marvelous counsels of God in governing His saints must be learned, and the hearts of the godly must become accustomed to them. When you have a promise of God, it will happen that the more you are loved by God, the more you will have it hidden, delayed, and turned into its opposite.

For if God did not love you so exceedingly, He would not play with you in this manner; that is, He would not delay His promise and help and turn it into its opposite. These are the surest signs of a heart that is fatherly and burns with love for you. Thus a father according to the flesh who loves his son plays with him and promises him a small present, but he defers and pretends that he will refuse to do what he has promised. He does this because23 he loves his son very much and wants to give richly, provided that his son perseveres and swallows and overcomes the delay. In this way God plays with us too. But we grumble and are displeased at a delay, no matter how short it is. What is being promised us we want to get either now or in another manner and in another way, whatever that way may be.

Therefore the examples of the fathers teach us what the true forms of worship are, namely, genuine faith, perfect hope, and unwavering love. These virtues lead us to the realization that God is present and beneficent, no matter how He seems to be against us.

Besides, it is apparent that Ishmael was a great theologian who carefully unfolded the force and grandeur of the promises, which are certainly great and magnificent; and it is apparent above all that his mother Hagar was worthy of hearing the angel call her back to her mistress Sarah. All this he published abroad and praised richly. Thus any nation or house wants to be superior to the rest and to be the sole ruler of the world but despises the rest in comparison with itself. Therefore Ishmael carefully impressed the promises made to him and was able to say: "I see that the Lord is with me and He has blessed me even spiritually." At the same time he also retained and enriched the outward worship he saw in his father's house, and through ceremonies of that kind some of his domestics and sons came to the knowledge of godliness, just as many of the family and descendants of Cain were joined to the true church of Adam, and in our day very many are gathered into our little church.

In the same way many from the house of Ishmael joined the church in the house of Abraham, especially Ishmael himself, who, I believe, after repenting, returned and became a member of the true church—not from the flesh but from the spirit, because according to the flesh he was rejected. But in the text he is also praised spiritually. Furthermore, Moses has related above (v. 9) that he buried his father Abraham with reverence. This proves that he was not estranged from the church in the house of Isaac. Therefore I hold that he was a good and godly man, even though he was a warrior. He also gave striking names to his sons. For רדָקֵ means "sad," "gloomy," "morose"—like the monks—as one about to die in sorrow; and perhaps the saintly man was in some sorrow when he gave this name to his son. At the same time it also denotes "homage" or "one to whom homage is paid."

I am passing over the nonsense of the Jews concerning these names.24 To me it seems that one can conclude from this that Ishmael carefully preached the God of Abraham and accustomed his domestics to the true worship which he himself had previously seen. But because it usually happens that the true worship produces superstition, so his descendants, after they had lost the true forms of worship, retained only some outward show and hypocrisy. For when the First Commandment has been discarded, useless chaff and husks remain. Thus when people saw at first that Abraham offered sacrifices in one way or another, blessed, and gave thanks, they adopted that outward worship, but without the First Commandment. Thus people become apes of their fathers, because they imitate outward works and disregard faith.

This is the origin of all forms of idolatry. The heathen saw that Abraham and the other fathers worshiped the Creator of the most beautiful light with their faces turned toward the rising sun. This they imitated. But they retained only the shell. They lost the kernel.25 Thus the sectarians receive the Word from us; but they do not do so in the proper manner, because they misuse it for vainglory and popular applause. Thus the Ishmaelites called themselves sons of God. Today they do not want to be

- 166 called Hagarenes; they want to be called Saracens,26 solely on account of the imitation and show of the outward worship and because of the physical blessing which the Arabs, who are Ishmaelites, still have, as was stated above in the promise (Gen. 16:12): "His hand against every man." They hold dominion over the world and boast that the spoils and booty are due them. They live on what they seize. Even though the Turks, who are Scythians, have taken possession of Arabia and are the masters there, they nevertheless retain the Arabic language, and its principal use is at the Turkish court. But before this they were never completely conquered either by the Romans or by the Persians. The Turk has humbled them. Nevertheless, they administer the rule jointly. Accordingly, Ishmael was first blessed carnally, since 12 princes were born to him. Now the spiritual blessing will follow.

17. (These are the years of the life of Ishmael, a hundred and thirty-seven years; he breathed his last and died, and was gathered to his kindred.)

Ishmael lived 137 years. He was born when Abraham was 86 years old, 14 years before the birth of Isaac; he died 48 years after Abraham. But Isaac long outlived Ishmael. Yet Ishmael saJacob and Esau, the sons of Isaac. This text clearly points out the spiritual blessing of Ishmael, because Moses employs the same words that he employed above in his description of Abraham's death. Not even a tittle has been changed. Consequently, he is bearing witness that Ishmael lived in the true faith and in godliness, since he states that Ishmael was gathered to the people of the saints.

עוַַגָּ means "to expire peacefully," when someone lies down, as Abraham did above (v. 8). When the hour of death draws near to him, he breathes his last without terrors but as the body is usually destroyed, in order that the soul may be freed from the workhouse of the body. In this manner Ishmael, too, died. The Lord granted him a saintly and peaceful end of his life. His strength left him, and by breathing his last he finally brought his life to a close and was carried into the bosom of the sainted fathers, where Abraham and the other fathers went shortly before. This is the spiritual blessing.

Moreover, it is a beautiful and pleasing description of immortality when Moses says (Gen. 25:8): "He was gathered to his people." We are now living among the rude people of the world who are estranged from God and in the kingdom of the devil. But when we depart from this wretched life, we shall have a pleasant struggle and shall be gathered to our people, where there is no misfortune, no tribulation, and no affliction, but peace and rest and a quiet sleep in the Lord. But if there is another people besides the one with which we are now living, there must be a resurrection of the dead. This is most certain proof that there is a God and that the world was not created without purpose. For to live after death is not the work of man; it is the work of God.

Pliny and the Epicureans laugh at these things and do not agree that there is a passing from a turbulent kind of life to rest. For this reason the Epicureans bandy these sayings: "After death there is no pleasure," "Perish the fellow who bothers about what the future holds," "Neither fear nor wish for your last day."27 In this manner they strengthen themselves for the purpose of despising death; and they completely remove the fear, that is, the hope of immortality. "Of what should I be afraid? Or what should I hope for?" they say. "Because there is no God, let us eat, drink, be merry, etc." But if reason were to grant that there is a departure from an afflicted people to a people of peace; it would necessarily also have to admit that there is a life after this life; for to go to a people is not to go to nothing, especially when one speaks of going to one's own people, who had the same faith, hope, and affliction, and had the same language, to our fellow citizens and fellow countrymen, who surely are something. We do not go to enemies or to evil spirits. Indeed, we withdraw from them and are gathered to our fathers.

These are the testimonies of the fathers concerning the resurrection, immortality, and life eternal, namely, because in that place there are peoples. Consequently, it is inevitable that we live and rise again. Those who believe this Word will never be influenced by the nonsense of Epicurus. But reason neither understands nor accepts this. Indeed, what is more, it sees before its eyes that procreation takes place from nothing; yet it does not reach the conclusion that this is the work of God. I see that Isaac is born of a barren mother and of a dead womb as hard as the bones in the skull. I see no hair, no body, and no soul. Nevertheless, from the loins of Abraham and from the womb of his mother Sarah comes forth a son who has all these things. Do they not originate from nothing? Surely the semen and the womb are dead things, and more dead than a seed that falls into the soil. Therefore reason should not think that this is a natural operation, as it dreams. But it is blindness and the wickedness of the devil that we do not look at or consider these things. Therefore if we follow the lead of reason, we understand neither the future resurrection nor procreation. For he who does not believe the resurrection of the dead does not believe or perceive the miracle of procreation either, namely, that a human being is born from a human being, a beast from a beast.

Indeed, the entire world is full of evidences of resurrection.28 From a tree and its very hard wood springs forth a most beautiful little flower; leaves, branches, and most delightful fruits are produced.

But because this is a frequent and common occurrence, it becomes commonplace. So great is the stupor of human minds that if Lazarus were raised daily, unbelievers would nevertheless not be

- 168 affected at all. Yet it does not follow from this that one should not hope for another kind of life—a life that is better and is blessed. But the experience and manifestation of that eternal joy are delayed until the hostile people pass away and our people remain—the people who, together with us, have believed the resurrection of the dead. On account of this testimony of Holy Scripture concerning Ishmael, therefore, we make him a saint and a great patriarch, although his descendants degenerated and were not like their father.

18. They dwelt from Havilah to Shut, which is opposite Egypt in the direction of Assyria; he died in the presence of all his brothers.

Even today, or at least at the time of Jerome, the children of Ishmael had possession of these places.29 Nebaioth, the first-born, occupied a large part of Arabia, but not all of it. From him the region called Nabatea got its name. It is celebrated in the books of Greek and Latin writers especially for the one reason that among the inhabitants of that nation ingratitude toward parents and teachers was punishable by death.30 This outstanding discipline and theology existed in that region. With such severity did those nations punish what many are permitted to do with impunity today.

The other part of Arabia is Kedar. It is no less celebrated and is the name of all Arabia Petraea.

The Edomites appropriated part of it. In Ps. 120:5 we read: "Woe is me, that I dwell among the tents of Kedar!" That is, I am a foreigner among the Muscovites and the Tartars. The stretch from Havilah to Shut is in Arabia, or is the desert between Egypt and the Holy Land. But of Shut it is said that it faces

Egypt because it has a common boundary with Egypt. Accordingly, the children of Ishmael inhabited that region from the Red Sea as far as the Euphrates. They had possession of almost the whole of Arabia except that part which the Idumaeans occupied.

About the last clause—"he died in the presence of all his brothers"—the expounders argue in various ways.31 The usual explanation holds that Ishmael died in the presence of his brothers, that is, his sons, who, having been summoned by their father, assembled to hear and comfort their father, so that he expired in the sight and presence of his brothers. It is my own opinion—although I shall make no positive statement—that Moses is not speaking about Ishmael personally, because Ishmael had already died. Furthermore, he did not say previously that he dwelt, but that they dwelt—namely, the 12 sons—in that stretch from the Red Sea toward Egypt. Or if you should say that after Ishmael died, he dwelt, this would be understood of his descendants, just as below there is a similar expression, namely, that Jacob went down into Egypt and went up from32 Egypt. And in Ps. 114:2 we read: "Judah became his sanctuary." In those instances proper nouns become appellatives and names of nations. This is common in Holy Scripture. Therefore I think that the meaning is the same as in the earlier passage

(Gen. 16:12): "He shall dwell over against all his kinsmen." This is expressed in our passage by "he died," or "he fell down," or "he pitched his tent." That is, after their father had died and had left his testament, in which he urged the sons and brothers to love and worship God, they raged cruelly after the fashion of wild beasts, with violence and the sword and occupied the land. They became יםלִפִִנְ, as is stated elsewhere (Num. 13:33).

19. These are the descendants of Isaac, Abraham's son: Abraham was the father of Isaac, 20. and Isaac was forty years old when he took to wife Rebecca, the daughter of Bethuel the Aramean of Paddan-aram, the sister of Laban the Aramean.

I have frequently pointed out—and it must be impressed frequently—that in the accounts of the fathers it is most delightful to see how they are described as true human beings, weak and altogether like us. On the other hand, under that human weakness there were most saintly angels and sons of God. For, what is most surprising, in the kind of life involving the management of a household they had absolutely no unusual or special semblance of saintliness; and when the flesh, that is, the wise men of this world and the monks, sees this weakness, it is greatly offended and has profound contempt for the saintly patriarchs. Thus Augustine confesses about himself that he laughed at the accounts of Isaac and the other patriarchs when he was still a Manichean, because he kept in mind nothing else than that most ordinary kind of life, namely, having a wife, begetting children, having a few sheep and cattle, and living with one's fellow citizens and neighbors.33 What could one learn from this that is uncommon or unique? Or why are these seemingly unimportant and unprofitable facts read and presented?

- 169 It is indeed a misfortune of the flesh that34 in this manner it must remain attached to the common weakness in respect to which the fathers are like other people and must therefore be offended and find fault with the ordinary life and invent another, extraordinary kind of life, such as celibacy, monasticism, the priesthood, etc. For an ungodly person must not see the glory of God; he must see only the weak and foolish things and, if I may use this expression, the nullity of God. But he must not see the glory and majesty, the power and wisdom of God, even if they are set before his eyes. Thus here Moses relates in a very simple manner that when Isaac was 40 years old, he married a weak little woman from Mesopotamia in Syria. What is this? Do not other people contract marriages that are similar to this one or sometimes more splendid? Why, then, do we read about these things? I answer that the flesh is permitted to see the human nature and weakness in the saints but by no means to see the divine nature and the saintliness of the angels, in order that it may be offended and seem to have found a reason for inventing new forms of worship in which to put saintliness.

Moreover, it is not without purpose and beside the point when Holy Scripture states that Isaac married Rebecca when he was 40 years old. For it points out that he did not take a wife in the wellknown first passion of youth but stood firm for a considerable time in his battle against and victory over the flesh and the devil. For the accounts and the experience of individuals attest how great the impatience of lust is in youth, when the urgent sensation of the flesh begins and the one sex has an ardent desire for the other. This is a malady common to the entire human race, and those who do not resist its first flames and do not suppose that there is something for them to endure, plunge into fornication, adultery, and horrible lusts; or if they take wives rashly and ill-advisedly, they involve themselves in perpetual torture. Accordingly, Isaac endured that conflict and contended most valiantly with the flame and his flesh, because he was a true and complete human being just as we are.

Moreover, our nature has been created in such a way that it feels the passions of the flesh at about the twentieth year. To endure and overcome those passions up to the fortieth year is surely a heavy and difficult burden. In this last age our young people refuse to assume this burden; they are unwilling to have patience for a moderate period of time. Therefore if they take wives during those first manifestations of passion, the devil, who earlier inflamed them with lust, later on cools them down with a breath to the opposite effect and causes them to go to extremes in their hatred of the woman.

Those things are truly diabolical. Therefore the heart should first be instructed by the examples of the fathers, in order that it may be able to undertake and keep up that first battle against the flesh. The maturer age, which has arrived at the years of manhood, has its own battles—battles that are greater.

During adolescence love begins to learn, just as it is described in adolescents in the works of the comic poets.35 But the sacred accounts present examples in which the victory, and at the same time the battles against the flesh, are set forth. Thus Isaac, too, felt the flames of lust just as other adolescents do. But he was taught by his father that one must Contend against these flames, first by reading Holy Scripture and praying, and then by working, being temperate, and fasting. These should be the exercises of adolescents, at least for one year or two, in order that those who are no longer able to be continent may learn nevertheless what the endurance of lust means. For this, too, is endurance and martyrdom, just as some assume several kinds of martyrdom, among which they count a rich, generous, and chaste young man.36 Indeed, this man is surely a martyr, because he is crucified every day by the passions of his flesh.

Young people should avoid promiscuity. In order to be able to protect their chastity, they should strengthen their hearts against the raging desire of the flesh by reading and meditating on the psalms and the Word of God. If you feel the flame, take a psalm or one or two chapters of the Bible, and read.

When the flame has subsided, then pray. If it is not immediately checked, you should bear it patiently and courageously for one, two, or more years and persist in prayer. But if you can no longer endure and overcome the burning desires of the flesh, ask the Lord to give you a wife with whom you may live in a pleasing manner and in true love. I myself have seen many people who gave free rein to their passions and fell into detestable lusts. But in the end they had to endure woeful punishments; or if on a blind impulse they were fixing their minds on marriage, they got wives who were not at all suited and obedient. This, of course, served them right.

All people should know that they have been called to war against the flesh. This is one battle. The second is against the devil. The third is against the world. Therefore one should not yield immediately

- 170 to those first impulses, especially in this era, when the hope of marriage has reappeared. We did not have it in the papacy, for he who wanted to become a priest was compelled to vow perpetual celibacy.

That papal tyranny has now been brought to light, and true freedom has been restored. Consequently, you should learn to pray and to wage war against the flesh. But then ask God to give you a Rebecca and not a Hagar or someone worse. For a good wife does not come by chance and without God's guidance; she is a gift and not the result of our own plan or will, as the heathen think.

Isaac was not brought up in this heathen manner. He undoubtedly did not escape the vexation and the flame of his flesh during the 40 years he lived before his marriage, for the flesh contends against the spirit no less in the household than in the government or in the church. But he obeyed his father

Abraham, who instructed him to meditate on the commandments of God and by means of sacred studies to arm himself for the first battle. This is why God later on gave him Rebecca, with whom he led a quiet and peaceful life. Holy Scripture points this out in a concealed manner, and in the matter of the weakness that has been mentioned it presents Isaac to us as a most excellent example of a young man's chastity, which is important because it is a war in which young people are involved. And the chastity of Isaac includes the upbringing and instruction through which he learned to avoid bad company; and evidence is given that he was diligent, meditated, prayed, and engaged in work. Here all this is discernible in a concealed manner in those 40 years during which he lived without a wife.

Moreover, it seems to have been customary at that time for young men not to take wives before they were 40 years old, but for girls to marry when they were 10 years younger, as we saw above in the case of Sarah. I think that Rebecca, too, was 30 years old. After the Flood nearly all the fathers took wives when they were about 30 or 40 years old. Before the Flood they married later; they waited until they were 100, 80, or 90 years of age. After the Flood God accelerated the multiplication of the human race. Therefore the time was shortened, so that men married when they were 40 years old, and the women when they were 30. Consequently, that age was far better and far more excellent than ours.

We think that this evil is mitigated by satisfying lust through acts of fornication and adultery, but in this way human beings degenerate altogether into beasts and become unsuited for all good works. If they rush into marriage rashly and without the definite procedure prescribed by God, they do not take wives but incur punishment and perpetual annoyance, because they were without prayer and the fear of God. God forbids this when He says (Ex. 20:7): "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain," and also (Ps. 50:15): "Call upon Me in the day of trouble."

"But," someone will say, "such delaying is very annoying and unbearable." Right indeed. This is why I stated above that it is on a par with the other exercises in patience by the saints, like the suffering and annoyance of fasting, imprisonment, cold, sicknesses, and tortures. In the same way lust is a serious sickness and burden. But one must resist it and fight against it. Thus later on, when you hold a position in the government, you will be annoyed by other difficulties, such as thefts, robberies, and various kinds of human wickedness. In the church you will have to contend with heretics and with the devil, who assails faith, hope, and the love of God. But you have the Word; you have Holy

Scripture, your studies, exercises, and labors. From these your faith will grow and be strengthened.

Thus lust, too, when it has been overcome by prayer, will serve to increase faith and prayer. Therefore in these seemingly useless words Holy Scripture presents an outstanding example of Isaac's chastity and of the very fine discipline that existed in the church and in the house of Abraham.

21. And Isaac prayed to the Lord for his wife, because she was barren; and the Lord granted his prayer, and Rebecca, his wife, conceived.

This is another trial. After the flame of lust has ceased and Isaac has become a husband and has had Rebecca as his wife for 20 years (for so long does God delay the promise in which He had promised his father Abraham: "Through Isaac shall your descendants be named"), another affliction now follows, and indeed one that is far more burdensome than the previous trial. The victor over lust overcame the devil by his chastity up to the time of his marriage. In the marriage state he longs for offspring, in accordance with the promise; and he certainly has no slight hope, since he knows that his wife was prepared for him and brought to him in accordance with God's plan. But Rebecca does not bear a child; nor does she have a promise that she will be a mother, just as Sarah, too, did not have a promise at first. This undoubtedly troubled his heart, and to this trial were added fear of and worry about perpetual barrenness, which they considered to be a curse. For the fathers laid very great stress

- 171 on this statement (Gen. 1:28): "Be fruitful and multiply." They felt that a special blessing of God rested on this statement; and because they did not multiply, they supposed that they were cursed and under God's wrath.

Therefore one can easily conclude how severely Rebecca was tortured and how great Isaac's grief was when he saw that his wife almost despaired of having offspring; for at that time she was about 50 years old. Then she thought: "Now I shall be exhausted and unable to bear children." Isaac still had some hope. If Rebecca did not bear a child, he would take another wife, just as his father Abraham had done.

Rebecca was deprived of this hope, and she anxiously counted every year and day that had elapsed since she had married Isaac. She wondered whether her years and her age still left her any hope.

Therefore this was a far more burdensome trial than the earlier one, for poor Rebecca suspects that she is numbered among those women who have been deprived of the blessing of God. What, then, shall she do, since she sees that she has so anxiously desired offspring in vain? She has been barren for 20 years, and now she is becoming a woman as good as dead; for the year and the time when her womb would be dead were at hand. She undoubtedly asked her husband to pray for her. This one last help she found. She does not want to give him another wife and deprive herself of the glory of motherhood, as Sarah had given her maid Hagar to her husband (Gen. 16:3). Therefore Moses says: "And Isaac prayed to the Lord for his wife."37

But once again the flesh will be offended and will look down on this as ordinary and trivial. For of what importance is it that a husband prays for his barren wife? After all, there are many women who become pregnant without prayer, yes, even contrary to the wish and will of many of them who do not desire to have offspring. But observe that most excellent perseverance, endurance, and expectancy of faith which the flesh does not perceive, and you will find something you will marvel at. For Rebecca could not think about the promise without grief and deep emotion—the promise that descendants should be born from Isaac. While all other women, who neither prayed nor had a promise from God, had been blessed, she alone was living without any hope of offspring and was passing the time of her marriage in great sorrow and tears. Nevertheless, she keeps her faith and with great perseverance urges her husband to intercede for her with the Lord.

If one of us is distressed for so many years by the same kind of affliction or by other misfortunes, by diseases, by exile, and by imprisonment, and does not murmur and does not cast aside his endurance but perseveres firmly in faith and hope, he will see what Rebecca suffered. The flesh considers only the outward things and the things that pertain to the management of the home, namely, that she is engaged in domestic and daily tasks and sleeps with her husband. But it does not see that she has been patient, has sighed, and has wept throughout those entire 20 years; for those most excellent virtues, such as patience, faith, and waiting when the promise of God is delayed, are hidden from the eyes of the world. The flesh gives thought and marvels when it sees a monk in a gray garment, girt with a rope, refraining from eating meat, and yet having none of the faith, the endurance, the affliction, and the things that Rebecca has. Why? Because the world is blind.

But we should accustom ourselves to those conflicts which from time to time, one after another, are usually in store for the godly; and we should learn to believe and persevere, in order that we may not waver and abandon the promise but may be strong and fight against impatience and the fiery darts of the devil (Eph. 6:16), who impels our hearts to grumble and to be angry with God in order that he may destroy our faith and endurance in misfortunes. Let us set before ourselves the example of Isaac and Rebecca. Both waited 20 years, and meanwhile they saw the happiness and the fecundity of the ungodly, who ridiculed them and assailed them with abuse. They said: "Why did he marry that woman and woo a foreigner? Why did he not marry some respectable girl of our own families? Rebecca is done for and is rejected by God." She undoubtedly heard this sort of abuse, not without great grief in her heart and not without tears, just as Sarah deplored her barrenness and as Hannah mourns pitiably for the same reason (1 Sam. 1:11). Nevertheless she has overcome through patience and the strength of her faith.

We should praise these virtues, and in the accounts of the fathers we should carefully ponder those examples of patience. For this battle against the promise of God is very difficult. Through it ill will, murmuring, and impatience with God's delaying are overcome. This is characteristic of God, and He

- 172 is very correctly called "the Expected One." But we are called "the expectant ones." These designations should be perpetually observed by our eyes and hearts, in order that we may learn to crush the first impulses, lest we immediately murmur if He delays for one or two or more years what we are looking for. But let us remember that we must persevere and boldly overcome everything that puts our patience to the test, just as Rebecca learned to disdain the insults of other women and of her own domestics until eventually she prevailed over God through her own prayers and those of her husband.

The Hebrew verb רתַַעָ is very emphatic; for it is a special verb of praying and means "to pray importunately and beyond measure," in such a way that by knocking and importuning in a vexatious manner we annoy God. We call it "to prevail upon." First one must ask; in the second place, one must seek; in the third place, one must knock (Matt. 7:7). If we have cried: "Lord, God, help me in this misfortune; deliver me from this evil or from another one," and immediate deliverance does not follow, then one should look for all the examples of the fathers. "Look, O heavenly Father, how Thou hast aided Thy people at all times." If He still delays, you should nevertheless not stop praying but should say: "I shall not cease, and I shall not stop knocking; but I shall cry out and knock until the end of my life." Rebecca exhorted her husband in this manner: "Dear Isaac, do not become weary, and do not give up." And Isaac saw her tears and sighs, and he prevailed upon the Lord.

Consequently, one should learn from this that when we pray, we are most certainly being heard, just as so far the church has certainly procured peace through prayer and has restrained the Turk together with the pope. Only let us be on our guard lest after we have once begun to pray, we immediately grow weary. But let us seek and let us cast all our care, misfortune, and affliction on God

(1 Peter 5:7) and set before Him the examples of every kind of deliverance. Finally let us knock at the door with confidence and with incessant raps. Then we shall experience what James says (5:16): "The prayer of a righteous man has great power"; for it penetrates heaven and earth. God can no longer endure our cries, as is stated in Luke 18:5 about the unjust judge and the widow. But one should not pray only one hour. No, one must cry out and knock. Then you will compel Him to come. Thus I fully believe that if we devote ourselves to prayer earnestly and fervently, we shall prevail upon God to make the Last Day come.

In the same way Rebecca took refuge in earnest and persistent prayer and sighed anxiously night and day. Isaac, too, prayed for her and placed before God nothing else than that one trouble, namely, his wife's barrenness. We should learn from this that all our troubles, even those that are physical, should be placed before God, but above all the spiritual needs. Isaac prayed in this way: "If it means the hallowing of Thy name, and if it tends to preserve Thy kingdom, give Rebecca offspring." Where a promise is lacking, as Rebecca lacked it, prayer should supply this and should come to the rescue. But it is a difficult thing and requires great exertion. It is far more difficult than the preaching of the Word or other duties in the church. When we teach, we experience more than we do; for God speaks through us, and it is a work of God. But to pray is a most difficult work. Therefore it is also very rare.

Hence it is something great for Isaac to have the courage to lift up his eyes and hands to the Divine Majesty and to beg, seek, and knock; for it is something very great to speak with God. It is also something great when God speaks with us. But this is more difficult; for our weakness and unworthiness come along and draw us back, so that we think: "Who am I that I should have the courage to lift up my eyes and raise my hands to the Divine Majesty, where the angels are and at whose nod the entire world trembles? Shall I, wretched little man that I am, say to Him: 'This is what I want, and I beg Thee to give it to me?'" The great crowd of the monks and the priests has no knowledge of this; nor do they know what praying is, although some of the godly overcome these thoughts more easily. But really efficacious and powerful prayers, which must penetrate the clouds, are certainly difficult. For I, who am ashes, dust, and full of sins, am addressing the living, eternal, and true God. Therefore it is no wonder that he who prays trembles and shrinks back. Thus long ago, when

I was still a monk and for the first time read these words in the Canon of the Mass: "Thou, therefore, most merciful Father," and also: "We offer to Thee, the living, the true, and the eternal God," I used to be completely stunned, and I shuddered at those words. For I used to think: "With what impudence I - 173 am addressing so great a Majesty, when everybody should be terrified when looking at or conversing with some prince or king!"38

But faith, which relies on the mercy and the Word of God, overcomes and prevails over that fear, just as it conquered it in Isaac, who despaired of all human help; for no one is able to help his barren wife. Therefore he takes heart and directs a fervent and powerful prayer to God. Such outstanding boldness and greatness of faith the flesh does not see. But this is written for our sakes, in order that we may be bold and confident, and may learn to pray; for the prayers of believers cannot be in vain. Thus

Isaac does not pray in vain either; but, just as Moses says: "And the Lord granted his prayer," so the Lord will not disregard our sighs and cries either. Only let us be stirred up to pray.

At this point the Jews raise a question about the word חכַַנֹ. To the Jews it really means "straightforward" or "directly," stracks für sich, as in Is. 57:2: "Who walks חֹוכֹנְ, " that is who has turned aside neither to the left nor to the right. Accordingly, the Jews maintain that Isaac prayed directly in front of his wife.39 If it was the common custom to pray in this manner, Rebecca stood directly before him or fell clown on her knees, and he placed his hands on her as she wept and sighed.

And in this manner they implored the Lord together. If there had been such a rite of praying, the proper meaning of the word could be retained; but if it was not an accepted custom, it has to be explained in a spiritual manner, namely, that he prayed with his whole heart and with concentration on his wife's misfortune, just as when I pray for someone, I present him to myself in the sight of my heart and see, or think of, nothing else but look upon him alone in my heart.

Thus Isaac prayed while he had his wife before his eyes. In this way Moses wants to point out that it was a fervent and earnest prayer, in which he was not hesitant and did not roam about in his heart and thoughts. A prayer of this kind is praised in the case of the man who had made a bet with Bernard that he would say the Lord's Prayer without any wandering thoughts. But since they had staked a horse and, in accordance with their agreement, he was forced to confess the truth after finishing his prayer, he confessed that while he was praying, he had been concerned about the saddle and the bridle, whether these had to be added to the horse or not.40 The prayer of the godly should not be like this, because this prayer is not spoken in a straightforward manner. Instead, the heart wanders now to the right and now to the left. But a true and fervent prayer presents the case to God and with great zeal and fervor directs its attention to this matter alone. It is not disturbed either by any presumption or by any doubt; it says: "Lord God, consider this afflicted little woman and Thy promise." It neither thinks of nor is concerned about anything else. And this is that unremitting, that is, earnest and straightforward, prayer of a righteous man of which the Epistle of James (5:16) speaks.

And Rebecca, his wife, conceived.

This passage is outstanding and noteworthy to the highest degree. Paul discusses it in an excellent manner in the Epistle to the Romans (9:10–13): "And not only so, but also when Rebecca had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad, in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of His call, she was told: 'The elder will serve the younger.' As it is written: 'Jacob

I loved, but Esau I hated.'"

Here indeed we shall gladly stand up before St. Paul and grant him tutorship and the honor that he alone was able to explain this passage as it deserves; for we are unable to present any other or better explanation. Nevertheless, because something has to be said, we, as imperfect pupils, want to follow the most perfect teacher. I surely would never have looked at these words in this manner. Moses says:

"Rebecca conceived." But how? Not only physically or by the strength of nature, but the saintly patriarch Isaac procured this conception through his prayer. And this is no ordinary glory for Isaac.

Although so many patriarchs were still living and saw those little boys, namely, Abraham, Shem, Shelah, and Eber, yet no mention is made of the praying of all these. To Isaac alone, as the heir of the promise, the glory is assigned that he prayed; that is, that he performed a priestly duty by placing his hands on Rebecca in accordance with the rite that was customary for priests. Consequently, this conception is not the result of the flesh or of nature; God wanted it to take place through the prayer of the saintly patriarch as the result of his faith, hope, and love.

- 174 Consequently, this passage teaches the same thing that Paul teaches in his Epistle to the Romans, where he distinguishes birth as a result of the flesh, that is, as the result of creation, from spiritual birth. For God preserved the former after Adam's fall, even though nature had become corrupted through sin and the devil, who had told Adam to become equal to God through the same fall through which Lucifer fell from heaven. Nevertheless, God did not deprive nature of procreation but permitted the godly as well as the ungodly to procreate. The only thing He wanted to point out was that it is not enough to be born into this world of the flesh, but that over and above the birth that remained in nature the rebirth and renewal of regeneration through the Holy Spirit is necessary. To prove this, St. Paul made use of this passage concerning Esau and Jacob and of the earlier one concerning Isaac and Ishmael. Both were born according to the flesh and the first birth, but neither would have come into the kingdom of heaven from the kingdom of man if Isaac had not been appointed the heir through the new birth. The same thing is true in the case of Jacob.

And God made use of these illustrious persons in order to present outstanding examples to the exceedingly arrogant nation destined to be the descendants of Abraham. For He knew their ungovernable pride, and their necks, which were harder than iron on account of the glory of being the children and descendants of Abraham. Therefore He wanted to put this warning in the text to stop the arrogant mouths of the Jews and to dispose of their argument concerning their birth according to the flesh. For this birth is in no wise adequate. No, regeneration is necessary over and above that birth. No matter how saintly the fathers Abraham, Isaac, etc., are, they nevertheless do not beget children of the kingdom by means of the first birth, which was instituted at the beginning of the world and was corrupted by the devil. But over and above the creation the call must be added. For thus says Paul

(Rom. 9:11–12): "Although they had done nothing either good or bad, because of His call she was told," not because of the man who created, because both were conceived and created alike. But in order that the world, and especially that stiff-necked people, might know that over and above the creation the call, which elsewhere is called the promise, is required, Paul adds the words "not because of works, but because of His call, she was told: 'The elder will serve the younger.'"

This subject matter has been debated and discussed without interruption since the beginning of the world, just as the conflict between the brothers began in the womb of their mother. And the end of this war is not yet, because it is the same strife that took place between Cain and Abel and between the descendants of the serpent and the Seed of the woman. The first birth is arrogant and puffed up beyond measure, especially if the prestige of the parents is added, that is, that they have descended from the blood of the fathers. Then one must consider wealth, power, dominion over the world, wisdom, righteousness, and religion. This is the source of the hatred between Cain and Abel, between Ishmael and Isaac, between Esau and Jacob, and between the church of God and that of the devil. And the church of the devil is continually eager to have dominion, first on account of blood and the lathers, as the cause nearest at hand; in the second place, on account of the temporal blessing. "We are the children of the fathers," they say. "We have been blessed with royal authority, religion, wealth, most brilliant victories, and miracles. Finally we have been exalted to such an extent that all nations are the tail, as it were, but we are the head." This argument seems to be irrefutable and incontrovertible. But Scripture says the opposite. Not those who are born of the flesh, not those who are the children of the fathers, are for this reason children of God; for, as John says, the children of God are born, "not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of God" (John 1:13).

Therefore the strongest argument that can be opposed to the previous one is to be found in the fact that God made a distinction between Isaac and Ishmael and between Jacob and Esau, who were born in the same way of Abraham and Isaac. Nevertheless, Ishmael, no matter how much he desires it, cannot be the heir. No, the seed of the promise, which has the call and, over and above the first birth, has the second41 and regeneration, is given the preference.

But this is the source of perpetual war from the beginning of the world to the end, not about trivialities42 but about that glorious title "church," the people of God, the kingdom of heaven, and eternal life. Thus today we are at variance with the church of the pope, which wants to be the people of God and to have possession of the kingdom and the priesthood. They boast that they alone are the church of God which acknowledges God as the Father and worships Him properly. They condemn and persecute us as heretics and the church of the devil. This is what it means that the infants are at - 175 variance before they were born; for from the beginning there is a twofold church in the world, just as the seed is twofold: the seed of the serpent and the seed of the woman, which contend and are at variance with each other because of the title "church."

Paul certainly handed down an exceedingly clear and powerful dialectic when he pointed out the difference between the birth and the call. Where there is the birth alone, there is condemnation; for, as John says, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3:6) and "not of blood, etc." (John 1:13).

Paul says something else. "Because of His call she was told," he writes (Rom. 9:11–12); that is, the Word of God and the promise are necessary. Over and above the creature, he who wants to rule and be a son of God must hear Him, not as the God who creates but as the God who calls. But if the first birth were sufficient, why would we need God? The Turks are most honorable people, very wise and very religious. By means of the strictest discipline they are preserving the kingdom which they have acquired through great exertions. Therefore if the people of God were like the Turkish people, nothing more would have to be required. Besides, they are adorned by God with wealth, wisdom, glory, reason, and very brilliant victories. But what else is there among the Turks than the first birth? For reason is born of a woman; and to reason belong wisdom, civil rights, discipline, and laws. About all these people Holy Scripture says that they are lost and condemned before God.

In their time the Jews had both the blood and the glory of the flesh. The Turk has only the glory of the flesh. But the Jews gloried in the blood; that is, that they were born of the fathers and the prophets.

In addition, they had the glory of the flesh, namely, a kingdom, power, religion, and hypocrisy.

Therefore they were vainglorious in every way, not only because of the cause but also because of the effect. The cause was that they were born of most saintly parents; the effect was that they had a kingdom, glory, and wealth. The Turk does not have the glory of blood, for he is not descended from the fathers. But he has a kingdom, wisdom, and glory; and on the basis of these very important effects he tries to prove that his people is the people of God. But one asks: "Where is the call?" "There is no need for it," they say; "he first birth suffices. If man does what he can of himself, he will be saved."43

This is by no means the case; but the call is required, that is, the Word. If the first birth were enough, why would we have need of the Word? Why does God call from the east to the west? Are we not righteous, saintly, and sensible men? But in opposition to all this God says: "This is what I want. All flesh is grass, and all its beauty is like the flower of the field" (Is. 40:6)—so that no one may glory in his flesh and blood but may acquire the renewal which takes place when God calls. Otherwise all glory, both of the cause and of the effect, will be vain and worthless, and a people that trusts in this glory alone will be condemned eternally.

But when there is teaching of this kind, the Jews rage and almost go crazy; for in the matter of the first birth they have lost their reason and do not advance to the thought of the second birth. Thus they perish. In like manner, the Turk takes pride simply in the first birth and does not concern himself about the call. The pope has been wholly absorbed in the same birth to such an extent that he has accommodated all godliness and religion to it, as when he taught that the Sacrament of the Altar is a mere work that is performed44—a work by which the godly manifest their obedience toward the church. Nothing is there except the nature resulting from the first birth, which can understand the work that is performed, that is, obedience to the church. Later on he filled the world with laws which are the fruits of an evil tree, although they have a very respectable and beautiful outward appearance; but there I do not hear the God who calls and promises. No, there I hear a human being who is performing a work as the result of the first birth.

Consequently, we are at variance, just as has happened in the entire world from the beginning to the end. We say that they are not the church, for they glory only in the first birth. They, on the other hand, condemn us, who believe the God who calls and promises. We look for salvation from that source. Who will be the arbiter and judge here? This text: "Not those who are of the flesh, but those who are of faith." The call and the promise are required to obtain salvation. If the question is asked whether a Turk will be saved, the answer is: "He will not." "Yet here there are wisdom, a most respectable life, a manifold worship, respect and obedience toward the government, and outstanding military discipline." "Indeed, they are here." "But to what do all these things pertain?" "To the first birth." Therefore he must be condemned and cannot be a child of the kingdom; for the call and the rebirth are lacking, and he wants to be saved through his first birth, which is corrupt unless it is

- 176 restored through regeneration. Therefore it is sure that the Turk is not the church. Nor are the Jews; for they do not have the call, although neither the cause nor the effect is lacking, as has been stated above.

Thus the church of the pope is not the true church, because they walk in the first birth and presume to obtain salvation as the result of works. But where, over and above the first birth, God adds the call, as Paul says (Rom. 9:11–12): "Because of His call she was told," there you will find the church. The Romans were the authors of very fine rights and laws, as the poet praises them: "Remember, O

Roman, to rule the peoples."45 But they are nothing else than reason which is born of the flesh through a woman and a man. This is altogether unprofitable and dead before God. Consequently, no papist or Turk or monk or jurist or physician will save himself;46 for whatever there is in the entire world in the way of very fine and useful things is all condemned by one name, namely, because it is flesh and the glory of the flesh (cf. Is. 40:6).

Therefore this is the teaching of the true church: We are not only created and born of flesh, but God sent His Word and calls us; that is, He proclaims the remission of sins and the adoption of sons through Jesus Christ. If we believe this, we are the church. Thus Isaac is the son of the promise and does not have that sonship from Abraham and Sarah, because this is a birth of the flesh. No, he has that sonship as the result of the words "Isaac shall be the seed." The same thing is true of Jacob. He is part of the church, not because he was born of Isaac but because the voice of Him who calls says:

"Jacob is the younger. Nevertheless, he must be the master." Thus Abraham was a very wise and honorable man in Babylon. He had one legitimate wife and lived chastely with her, but he would have perished with all this if God had not called him out of Ur of the Chaldeans.

Therefore the true church must be distinguished in this manner from the false church, which is presumptuous either on account of blood—that is, because of birth—or on account of the effect.

Ishmael reasons from the cause: "I was born from Abraham and am indeed the first-born.

Consequently, I shall be the people of God." The cause and the blood are there; but unless he has the call, his presumptions on account of blood and birth will all be in vain. Thus all the papists and Turks boast that they are the people of God, and although they cannot glory on account of the blood of the fathers as on account of the cause, they nevertheless glory on account of the effect, that is, on account of their power, righteousness, and religion, which are all of the flesh. But if you ask them whether in addition to this they have the other call—that they are the sons of God—they have no answer but vaunt only those great blessings of God, which is an empty glory and is poured out over those who are good as well as over those who are evil.

If you ask the pope why he is the people of God, he answers: "Because I am sitting in the seat of the apostles Peter and Paul and am their successor. Furthermore, I have a reason in Scripture (Matt.

18:18): 'You are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church.'" Even a dog or a swine, however, can sit in the place of St. Peter; but to have the call—that is, the Word which you believe over and above that succession—that, of course, establishes the church and the children of God. This the pope does not have, but he persecutes it in a hostile manner. Therefore he is not a son of God but is God's enemy and an adversary of Christ. We, however, have no doubt whatever that we are the church; for we have the Gospel, Baptism, the Keys, and Holy Scripture, which teaches that mankind is lost and condemned in original sin and that it must be born again through Christ.

Therefore this doctrine, which distinguishes between the true and the false church, is necessary.

God presented it to the Jews first, in order to destroy the pride they had in the glory of their blood by means of these outstanding examples in both houses, namely, that of Abraham and that of Isaac. For both Ishmael and Isaac were born of the same blood of Abraham. Nevertheless, Ishmael is not the heir; for he wants to be saved through the first birth, and through it alone. But Isaac is the heir because he has the Word and the promise. Thus Esau and Jacob were descendants not only of one father but also of the same mother, and this is a stronger argument than the preceding one. For the father is the same, the mother is the same, and the blood is the same. But why is Jacob preferred to Esau? I answer that the call came to Jacob. On the basis of the first birth Esau presumes that the inheritance of the kingdom falls to him. God is displeased with that presumption and wants the renewal of his nature, apart from which no right to the kingdom or inheritance is left to be added. And on the basis of these passages we can powerfully and most effectively refute even our Jews, who still dream of that glory of the blood today. For two are begotten from the same blood, the one being the heir, the other not; and - 177 they are distinguished by the call. They are equals in regard to all glory of the flesh; but the one has the Word and hears it, the other despises it.

We have an altogether similar example in the pope's church and in ours; for we have the same Baptism, the same Sacrament of the Altar, the same Keys, and the same Scripture and Word. Finally we have our origin from the same apostles and the same church, as though from one mother Rebecca.

Why, then, do we disagree? We apprehend the Word in the Sacrament, follow the call, and discuss the Word in accordance with faith; but they do so in accordance with what is seen on the outside. We declare that when making use of the sacraments one must pay attention to the Word and accept it in faith; they make it a mere work that is performed. Therefore the true church is the one that holds fast to the Word and faith and does not rely on works but hears and follows God when He calls. But the call is the Word through which our nature, which has been corrupted by the devil and sin, is regenerated.

This is not an unimportant disagreement and struggle. And it is not without cause that our adversaries are angry with us in such a hostile manner, for we are debating about the most important matters in the entire world—not about the empire and not about wealth, prestige, or power but about eternal damnation and eternal life. This is the reason why the hatreds are so bitter. And nowhere are they bitterer than in disagreements in the matter of religion, for it is a most important and most serious cause. Are we children of God or children of the devil? They do not want to be children of the devil, but they usurp the glory and the name of true church and therefore condemn and kill us. On the other hand, we condemn them on the basis of the Word, and because of true evidences we are sure of our own salvation. We keep a firm hold on the difference which God established between Abraham and the Babylonians, between Ishmael and Isaac, and between Jacob and Esau, namely, the call by which Abraham was told (Gen. 12:1): "Go from, etc."; "Through Isaac shall your descendants be named"

(Gen. 21:12); and (Gen. 25:23): "The elder shall serve the younger."

Apart from this consideration the first birth is completely useless not only for Abraham, or for Isaac and Jacob, but for all human beings. Then indeed it is the source and origin of all evils. One can discern this in the example of the 12 patriarchs who descended from Jacob. They become murderers.

Indeed, they murder near relatives, and betray and slay their own father, because they sadden the very pious old man to such an extent that he wants to die (Gen. 37:35). And if someone wanted to exaggerate, this sin of theirs could very correctly be called patricide. Naturally, these are fruits and works of the flesh and blood. They show that by his nature man is completely like Cain and inclined to murder. God could surely also have made an example of the sons of Jacob; but he did not want to reject them and was content with these two proofs: Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob. And it is my opinion that they were saved, just as I also think that Ishmael and Esau repented and gave their assent to the call. Nevertheless, God wanted this proof to be there, that the first birth is nothing before God and that the flesh is altogether condemned together with everything it has and is able to do, no matter how great and excellent it may be, such as empires, laws, and justice. In this respect the reign of Augustus was by far the most glorious. Then wisdom, justice, riches, quiet, and magnificent victories flourished. But all these belong to the first birth, or to reason, creation, and the flesh. Therefore they are condemned.

Consequently, one must look to see whether there is anything over and above those natural gifts, no matter whether the heathen, the Turk, or the pope possess them. If the call is not there, you must maintain that all is completely lost and condemned. For God Himself judged in this manner and pointed out especially to this people in the instance of their own foremost fathers that apart from and over and above the first birth they had to be called. And the horrible crimes of the foremost patriarchs, who defiled themselves with patricide and incest, reveal what the first birth could do without the call.

The historical accounts of the kings and of the judges and finally that frightful crime when they crucified the Son of God and their Messiah bear witness to the same thing. This striking and astounding example of the conception of the two infants who struggled with each other in their mother's womb teaches these facts about the distinction between the true and the false church.

For the sake of those who at some time or other will read the commentaries of the rabbis let us next add something of the Jewish nonsense.47 At this point they raise the question why Isaac did not marry another wife after he had discovered in the course of almost 20 years that his wife was barren,

- 178 while in the example of Sarah they conclude that 10 years should be allowed for discovering barrenness or fecundity. Their answer is that in Isaac's case the situation is different from what it is in the case of Abraham. They say that because Isaac was sacrificed to God and became a burnt offering by the direction of God, he was not permitted to marry another wife. Thus Paul wants a bishop to be the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:2). Everybody sees how absurd and worthless these ideas are.

Nevertheless, they must be touched on at times, in order to advise those who are students of the Hebrew language to read the sayings and writings of the Jews with discretion. We acknowledge, of course, that it is a great benefit that we have received the language from them; but we must beware of the dung of the rabbis, who have made of Holy Scripture a sort of privy in which they deposited their foulness and their exceedingly foolish opinions. I am advising this because even among our own theologians many give too much credit to the rabbis in explaining the meaning of Scripture. In the matter of grammar I readily bear with them; but they lack the true sense and understanding, in accordance with the well-known words in Is. 29:14: "The wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the discernment of their discerning men shall be hid." This statement declares that there will be no understanding of Scripture among the Jews. No, this book of Holy Scripture has been closed for them and sealed. "With an alien tongue the Lord will speak to this people" (Is. 28:11). And they know nothing else than sheer blasphemies against the Christian religion.

Therefore there is no connection between the statement that Isaac was sacrificed and the statement that for this reason he cannot take a second wife. Abraham was dedicated to God just as much as Isaac was, yes, even more so; for he was called out of Ur of the Chaldeans and was immolated not once but often. Nevertheless, this sanctification does not prevent him from taking another wife. Thus Isaac would certainly have been permitted to take another wife if he had wanted to do so, but he preferred to bear everything and to suffer the worst in order to present himself as an example of patience and waiting. For there was also the great and sure hope that Rebecca would become a mother, since God had chosen her to be his wife, angels fetched her and were the bridesmaids, and his father appointed and sent the servant. But he is put off until the twentieth year because God wanted to try this saintly man and this saintly woman as an example and as instruction for all the churches.

22. The children struggled together within her; and she said: If it is thus, why do I live?

These accounts of the saintly fathers speak of procreation, of cohabitation, and of uniting man and woman. Nothing in the world seems more trivial and more laughable than this. Nevertheless, in these trivial matters most excellent examples of faith and of other virtues are presented. Rebecca, this pious and saintly woman who was flesh and blood just as we are, has been tried most severely for so many years. For in the first place, she was most certainly the mother chosen by God who was sought. She was found and was brought to her bridegroom by the angels in order that she might become a mother.

But absolutely nothing happens, and she is tried by God with a long cross and suffering. There indeed lust and pleasure were followed by sorrow, bitterness, tears, and distress. These, of course, are the joys of wedlock. Hence she prays and wishes to an extraordinary degree and ardently to become the mother of this seed. Later on, when she is heard and God is overcome by force, as it were, to make the barren

Rebecca fecund, another difficulty follows. It was hard to lose the hope she used to have as the result of being chosen and called by God, and to become the reproach of her neighbors and her domestics.

She has now obtained offspring and has become pregnant beyond, and contrary to, nature; her barrenness has been overcome, and she has conceived through a new miracle. But far greater difficulties remain to be borne. When she has the fetuses in her womb and congratulates herself that after such deep despair she is being cheered up by a hope so glorious that she will become the mother of twins, she, who formerly had been rejected and disdained and was already about to yield the glory of motherhood to another, as Sarah did (Gen. 16:2), is then at last driven to the limits of the most mournful despair. For although the children within her are struggling, she does not know for sure whether they are children or not. Therefore she says: "If it is thus, why am I?" This is Rebecca's elliptical way of speaking, since she is agitated and regrets her earlier prayer, in which she had wished to become pregnant. She thinks: "Would that I had never prayed! Why did I not have patience and give the right of motherhood to another woman, since I am being compelled to experience and bear much greater sorrows than before?"

- 179 This is a twofold, yes, a sevenfold trial; for Rebecca now feels that it would have been better to remain barren forever than to be so woefully afflicted and at the same time to have doubts about becoming a mother. This she is now compelled to give up a second time because at present she is feeling death and is beginning to be in peril of her life. For she does not know what evil there is, what sort of commotion there is in her womb. She feels only the struggling, and she cannot avoid accusing herself and finding herself guilty of folly for having so earnestly demanded offspring from God. She realizes that she will have to die in greater disgrace than if she had remained barren. Thus her hope of becoming a mother dwindles a second time. Indeed, the mother is destroyed with the unborn child. For whenever God lets our hope and prayer become weak, reason cannot feel or think otherwise than to say: "The longer I pray, the more severely I am afflicted and tormented."

Therefore will it be unnecessary to pray, to trust, and to hope? Must we be like the Epicureans, who now declare that they leave everything to God's will and direction, for the things God has decreed are bound to come to pass? Prayer should by no means be discontinued; for God has commanded us to pray, to believe, to call upon Him, to hallow His name, and to hope. God could gather a church without the Word, manage the state without a government, produce children without parents, and create fish without water; but He commands us and wants us to preach and to pray, and everyone to do his duty in his station. But if the outcome does not always come up to what we have determined in advance, we must nevertheless continue in our calling and leave the result and the issue to Him.

This is the kind of trial Rebecca underwent. For she thought: "Behold, you prayed God to give you offspring; it would have been better not to pray." When she feels the struggling, she does not think as yet that she is carrying children in her womb but supposes that it is some kind of monster. This is why she says: "If it is thus, why am I?" The common translation is "If this was going to happen to me, why was it necessary for me to conceive?" But the very saintly woman is indicating that she regrets and finds fault with her earlier prayer. It is as though she were saying: "If it was to be thus, it would have been better not to pray. If it was to be thus, why did I pray? Why did I wish to become a mother contrary to God's will?" These are the words of a woman who repents of her earlier prayer and is now despairing. People in very great despair make half-complete statements, and in their speech there are more interjections than nouns and verbs. The ellipses indicate the greatness of the grief in their afflicted and almost despairing hearts, as the heart of Rebecca was. For the main concern and anxiety of those saints concerned the promise of the Seed. Hence she despairs and thinks: "I shall not be a mother in that church; another woman, who is worthier, will be chosen after my death." In this way she gives up the thought of becoming a mother, as Sarah did above (Gen. 16:2) and as Rachel does below (Gen. 30:3). Rachel really was Jacob's wife. Nevertheless, she is compelled48 to yield the right of motherhood to another. "Go in to the maid," she says to Jacob.

Few people, however, give consideration to this in these accounts, just as the papists imagine that the only thing the fathers did was to satisfy their pleasures and lusts, as they themselves, who live without trials and hardships, do. But those saintly men felt very great emotions and afflictions, which readily removed every thought and feeling of pleasure. Numerous domestics had to be ruled, and meanwhile severe trials had to be borne, as though the fathers had been bereft of all divine help.

But these facts are presented to show and teach us, in the first place, that this physical procreation, no matter how vile and corrupt it is, nevertheless does not belong to nature but is a gift of God. This should be learned in the case of the fathers. To be sure, God scatters this gift among a large number of the worst human beings; but the godly realize that it is truly a gift of God, as Ps. 128:3–4 states: "Your children will be like olive shoots around your table. Lo, thus shall the man be blessed who fears the Lord." Therefore he who is godly should learn that it is a very great gift and a creation of God to beget and give birth to sons or daughters. For this reason we call God our Creator and our father. Nor should the ugliness of sin and punishment with which procreation has been covered prevent us from realizing that it is a blessing of God and a work that is acceptable and pleasing to God.

The ungodly do not understand this. They also use the rest of the creatures in vain, just as they use the Creator Himself in vain—to such an extent that not only the creature but also the Creator has been subjected to futility (cf. Rom. 8:20). But one must distinguish this distortion from the creature that God wants to be glorious and highly esteemed. Thus the saintly fathers learned from these trials that procreation is a work of God, and of God alone. And it is surely true that if it were not tainted with - 180 such loathsome lust and depravity, we could not help being amazed at the value and the miraculous quality of such a great work. For what is more marvelous than that a human being is born of a human being? But this is obscured and concealed by the loathsome sin of lust. Therefore it should be praised and made much of, in order that people may recognize the excellence of the work and of the divine blessing.

In the second place, these examples set forth faith, hope, and love, that is, the manner in which God customarily works with us; for thus He deals with the saintly patriarch, as is stated in Rom. 11:33:

"Unsearchable are His judgments and inscrutable His ways," not only in His works but also in His words and promises. For this reason nothing in the world seems more uncertain than the Word of God and faith, nothing more delusive than hope in the promise. In short, nothing seems to be more nothing than God Himself. Consequently, this is the knowledge of the saints and a mystery hidden from the wise and revealed to babes (Matt. 11:25). The pope and the Turk believe easily; because among them there are such great successes, and because they are flourishing with such great power, with wisdom, with the outward appearance of saintliness, and with their religion, to the point that there is nothing beyond this. The Turk maintains with such assurance that he is the people of God that he does not hesitate to give his life and head as a pledge. For he has the situation and God in his hands. God adorns him with the finest and highest gifts, and deals in the opposite manner with Christians. These He subjects to the cross and hands over to their adversaries to be killed like sheep for the slaughter (Rom.

8:36). On this account the Turk taunts us in the most insolent manner. This happened in the case of a defeat of the Christians. When the Turks saw corpses lying here and there with the noses cut off, they laughed at the misery of those who had been slain, and with virulent sarcasm they repeated these words: "Jesus Mary!" It is as though they were saying: "Where is their God now?"49

Hence we find those mournful laments in the psalms, such as "Arise!" in Ps. 7:6 and "Why dost Thou stand afar off?" in Ps. 10:1. Similar words are spoken by hearts that are in doubt as to whether we have a God and ask: "Where is your God?" (Ps. 42:10.) "We do not have to believe in Him who conceals and withdraws Himself from us, do we?" But the Turk does not know what he himself is doing or what is in store for us. He thinks that the Christians have been rejected and cast aside by God, and he takes God's favor and His election for granted and is hardened and obdurate to a greater extent than the devil himself. But when we are delivered into his hands and succumb, heaven is filled with martyrs, and the godly are spurred on to groan and sigh for the Last Day. But he hastens eternal destruction for himself. At the time of the Assyrians and the Babylonians God dealt no differently with the Israelites; no success, no victory, and no God was in sight. Then indeed God had hidden Himself, the God of Israel, the Savior, as is stated in Is. 45:15. Thus today heaven and earth, the pope and the Turk, and all things are against us; and God, in whom we believe, is altogether nothing. But the prince of the world and its god is god. On this account many among the Christians who have not been properly instructed and do not have the Word desert from us to the Turk. They see that everything is flourishing there, and from this they conclude that God gives them life but slays us and delivers us into the hands of the cruel enemy.

But we have nothing from God except the pure Word, namely, that the Lord Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father and is the Judge of the living and the dead, and that through Him we are kings and priests (Rev. 1:6). But where can this be discerned? Not in the indicative mood, but in the imperative and in the optative. Why He hides Himself in this way we shah see on that Day, when all enemies will have been put under His feet (1 Cor. 15:25). Meanwhile we should believe and hope. For if one could see it now before one's eyes, there would be no need of faith. But no matter how false our faith seems and how vain our hope, I know in spite of this that we shall tread the Turk under our feet and that those who now lie buried and whose blood he shed will tread him underfoot and thrust him down into hell. All the rest of the martyrs who were burnt by the emperor, the pope, the French, and others will do the same thing.50 For it is the wisdom of the saints to believe in the truth in opposition to the lie, in the hidden truth in opposition to the manifest truth, and in hope in opposition to hope.

This wisdom is set forth in this example of Rebecca. She has been heard and has been chosen to be a mother; but she is anything but a mother, even now, when she has obtained fecundity, and when abundant hope of becoming a mother has been given. In these circumstances all her hope and expectation collapses suddenly. Is this, then, the fulfillment of the Word of God? My answer is that - 181 one must simply cling to that knowledge of the saints and to the marvelous manner in which they are led. Thus when Christ Himself is about to enter into the glory of the Father, He dies and descends into hell. There all glory disappears. He says to His disciples (John 14:12): "I go to the Father," and He goes to the grave. Let us constantly meditate on such examples and place them before our eyes. For when we are killed by the Turk with much abuse and blasphemy, and when infants, old men, and girls are slaughtered with inhuman cruelty, we cry out: "Where is Christ? Where is our God?" They also taunt us: "Go now, and believe in Jesus." But even though they do not listen, we should answer them with confidence: "Behold, this infant which you have cut to pieces or impaled will be adorned in the other, better life with such great glory that you will wish for the happiness of being able to see the wounds you inflicted on it." For the Turk accomplishes nothing else than filling heaven with martyrs, because they are all being slain on account of the name of Christ. On the other hand, he is filling hell with his own body and with the bodies of his people.

Thus the pope (although he is worse than the Turk, because he believes nothing) imagines that those whom he has killed have been utterly annihilated and that he may rage with impunity against anybody he pleases. He spurs the sovereigns on to like cruelty. Meanwhile we complain51 that we are being killed and oppressed, and we cry (Ps. 44:23): "Why sleepest Thou, O Lord?" For God hides

Himself for a time, and, as is stated in the Song of Solomon (2:9): "He stands behind our wall, gazing in at the windows, looking through the lattice." Consequently He is not far away but is present and sees everything. Both the pope and the Turk, by the very fact that they are killing us, are compelled willy-nilly to serve us, so that we may "obtain the unfading crown of glory" (1 Peter 5:4), just as Herod also would never, by doing good, have been able to oblige the infants as much as he benefitted them by killing them. Thus He seems to have forsaken us too, because He ascended into heaven, is sitting at the right hand of the Father, and nevertheless leaves behind the Word and the sacraments.

The flesh will object: "But what is this? I do not see anything; it is merely a word." Indeed, it is the Word; but in it there is an extraordinary and divine power, which you will experience if you cling to it with a firm faith. Even if your life must be endangered, this matters little; for you are not far from rising again from the dead and being made alive. "Unsearchable are His judgments, and inscrutable are

His ways" (Rom. 11:33) toward His saints, as His only-begotten Son, who is the most perfect example of all sons, bears witness.

In this manner, then, Moses treats of most important matters in human procreation and in the physical work. Rebecca loses her glory of motherhood and God Himself, who had heard her and had made her pregnant. He withdraws His hand and hides His face, so that she no longer sees God's work of conception but sees some mockery of Satan. She has no other thought than that she has been cast aside and rejected. But He does not delay or keep aloof forever. Indeed, He manages all things in such a manner that the Word seems to be altogether of no account and nothing. But out of this nothing and out of what is of no account He makes everything through a very great and amazing change, so that what previously appeared to be everything perishes and is reduced to nothing. Thus the downfall of the pope has already begun, and through the Spirit of the mouth of Christ he will daily be done away with more and more. And in a short time it will happen that the Turk, too, will meet with the destruction he deserves.

So she went to inquire of the Lord.

Poor Rebecca feels that everything is lost and beyond hope. What, then, should she do? She goes to inquire of the Lord. So far it has seemed that she has been cast away from the face of the Lord, and her hope and faith are now in the greatest distress. But that very day is decisive. She comes to life again and goes to seek the advice of the Lord when she seemed to be in the uttermost distress and danger; for the string breaks most easily when it is stretched most tightly.52

The Jews argue about where Rebecca went to seek the advice of the Lord.53 The rabbis are too much like the monks when they say that she withdrew to a solitary place. Therefore we hold fast to the opinion of those who maintain that she went to the saintly patriarch Shem, who, together with Shelah and Eber, was still living. Those fathers governed the church and constantly held fast to the Word and the true forms of worship. Undoubtedly, however, she did not go to Shem of her own accord in such great distress but went at the advice and bidding of Isaac and Abraham, who were in the clutches of the same trial. She was sent to him as to a public place and to a public person, where they knew that - 182 the main church was. For Shem was a most saintly man who had in his charge the church, the Word, and the worship during so many centuries after the Flood. Hence his words were regarded as oracles.

But Rebecca inquired not only about her unborn child but also about her salvation and whether this was a sign of God's wrath or of His favor. For any misfortune, even if it is physical, brings with it despair or doubt concerning the will of God toward us. Therefore in every trial the heart must be fortified in advance and must be strengthened, lest it feel that it is being afflicted by an angry God who wants us to be destroyed eternally. For example, when the Turk and pope rage so savagely against us, we all have reason to be worried and in a state of trepidation. But if you have the Word and the sacraments, then, close your eyes and safely despise their cruelty to the extent that you say: "Rage and rave as much as you please! Even tear me in pieces bit by bit. In spite of this I know that Christ, my

Deliverer, lives and sits at the right hand of the Father. Therefore I, too, shall live; and I, in turn, shall trample you underfoot."

But that confident pride has its origin in the future state of affairs, not in what is happening at the present time. Reason follows only the things that are visible. But in this instance it must be killed, in order that the Word and faith may have room. Yet reason cannot be killed except through despair, mistrust, hatred, and murmuring against God, with the result that eventually the heart, after everything external has been removed, clings to and finds rest in the Word and the sacraments alone; for God is utterly incomprehensible and is nobody in all His works and miracles, because, according to our understanding, He forsakes us in suffering and afflictions and gives only the Word, by means of which He leads us through that sea of perils and trials to the port, just as a fish is pulled along by means of a hook.

23. And the Lord said to her: Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples, born of you, shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the elder shall serve the younger.

Up to this point it has been related how God was hidden, yes, even lost, for this most saintly little woman and even for Isaac and Abraham and also for all who were in that church, so that it was necessary to have recourse to the church and the patriarch Shem, and to seek help and advice there.

But now Moses records how that lost God is found again and appears—as an example for us, in order that we may not despair in our trials if our prayer relies on a definite promise but may be sure that it is impossible for God not to appear and answer, even if heaven and all creation were to threaten ruin and destruction.

But although that waiting is difficult, we should nevertheless have been taught and trained by the Holy Spirit in such a way that we know that God is forced to hear our prayers, because it is impossible for Him to lie. He had promised Isaac the blessing; but many difficulties and hindrances were put in the way of that promise, so that a weak heart could doubt that the promise was true. Although Rebecca did not have a promise, she nevertheless kept on praying. And if it is a true prayer—as Rebecca's prayer undoubtedly was—it must rely on the promise of God. For who would be bold enough in his own right to lift up his hands and eyes to God unless he were sure about the will of God? Accordingly, all prayer relies on the command and promise of God, because in the Second Commandment there is the Word of God, which teaches us to pray: "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain" (Ex. 20:7). Likewise: "Call upon Me in the day of trouble" (Ps. 50:15). But after you have prayed, you should know that just as you can have no doubts about the promise, so you should have no doubts about its being heard; for the foundation of the prayer is the promise—and not our will, not our worthiness, and not our merits. An outstanding example of this teaching is Rebecca's prayer, which, after so many hindrances, is finally heard in a wonderful way.

For at first, after she has become pregnant, Rebecca has no doubts whatever that she had been heard and helped by God. But that confidence is immediately disturbed by a new and unexpected danger. For the fetuses struggle with each other in her womb, so that she is again driven to despair.

But when her trepidation is at its greatest, God buoys her up once more with the Word and indicates that she has been truly heard. He does so to bear witness that He loves those who pray in faith and wait in prayer, that is, when praying is difficult.

Of such examples the papists have no knowledge or understanding, for their prayer is nothing else than mockery of God. But an earnest and fervent prayer, which does not cease and does not become tired but keeps on waiting up to the last moment, eventually forces its way through heaven and earth,

- 183 and it is impossible for it not to be heard. For it is a sacrifice most pleasing to God when we pray in such a way that the prayer surpasses our comprehension and understanding, as is stated in the Epistle to the Ephesians: "Who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think" (3:20). When the situation is hopeless and all plans and efforts are in vain, then be courageous, and beware of giving up; for God calls all things from the dead and from nothing. When no resource or hope at all is left, then at last God's help begins. And so these are perfect prayers. Meanwhile weak prayers and those of weak people should nevertheless not be despised. But the former are presented to us in their highest grade and by a perfect example, in order that we may try to imitate them. For at first—just as children learn the alphabet and Donatus54—we stammer in imperfect praying. This should by no means be despised; for just as he who does not learn the alphabet and Donatus will never learn to read Vergil or to speak Latin, so he who does not pray weakly will never achieve a perfect prayer. Consequently, the teaching of this passage should be carefully noted. It points out how great the power of prayer is and how perseverance in prayer is a sacrifice pleasing to God, just as Rebecca perseveres to the end when no counsel is left except to seek the advice of the church.

Moreover, Moses describes at very great length how Rebecca was heard. "The Lord said, " namely, through Shem. Above we stated that God also spoke through Adam,55 just as Christ explains in Matt. 19:4–5: "Have you not read that He who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said: 'For this reason he shall leave, etc.'?" God spoke these words. Nevertheless, in Gen.

2:23–24 Moses writes that Adam spoke them. Consequently, Adam was full of the Holy Spirit and of God, who spoke through Adam. Therefore the words of Adam are the words of God. Similarly, to this day whatever the church, full of God, says should not be received any differently from the way one should receive it if it had been spoken by God Himself. Thus God commands that we should obey our parents and the government, and that we should listen to His Word from them. In the same manner the Lord spoke to this most saintly matriarch through Shem, who, over and above the usual discernment of faith, was full of prophecy.

But the greatest and richest comfort is presented in these words: "Two nations," etc. For this is what Shem wants to say: "You have prayed, and your husband and Abraham have prayed with you.

But you think that your entrearies have not been heard and that you are about to die. But you should not fear this at all." And Shem quickly goes to the heart of the matter and to words of comfort. "For far from being in danger of your life," he says, "two nations will come from your womb. You have only been afflicted, and your prayer has been a test whether you are willing to persevere. Consequently, you should know that more has been granted than was prayed for, that more has been given than was asked for or understood. For you were not able to understand what or how much God would grant. He understood your prayer better than you did."

This example should be well noted and imitated by us; for we, too, pray against Antichrist, the Turk and the sects. And we surely have very important and desperate causes—so much so that we are unable to think of or to understand any relief or help apart from imploring God's mercy to hasten the coming of the Last Day. Therefore one must not cease praying, but those who are strong must cry out boldly, and those who are weak must cry out weakly, as Christ Himself says in Luke 18:7 about the godly, who cry out to Him day and night.

But our need and cause is greater and more difficult than it ever was in the church at any time. For we have against us the dregs and the end of the world, and that extreme rage of the pope and the Turk, who want to, and will, devour us. Therefore we must pray, and we must pray in such a manner that we rely on Christs command and promise. Although it seems that in a short time everything will go to ruin, what of it? Let it indeed go to ruin! In spite of this your prayers will obtain more than you ask for. For He Himself has given us the promise, and our prayer asks that the name of God be hallowed and that the kingdom of God be preserved in preference to everything, even in preference to help in our misfortunes. Therefore although everything is hopeless and here, too, we would all be killed, I nevertheless know that our adversaries must perish; they shall be brought down,56 because the prayer has been heard.

Accordingly, Shem comforts Rebecca in this manner: "Rebecca, your prayer has been heard richly and beyond all understanding. You asked the Lord for one child, and now, in this peril, you merely desire a successful childbirth without detriment to your life. Indeed, you would be satisfied if you

- 184 knew that your prayer has been heard. But be of good cheer and unconcerned about the birth, for God has heard you and has an excellent understanding of your prayer. You asked for one little son or daughter, but He Himself will enlarge that prayer and make a very rich addition to it. How? 'Two nations are in your womb, etc.' This surely means that your prayer has been heard; for those to whom you will give birth are not two sons but two very great patriarchs. Therefore not only the prayer concerning the birth of a son has been heard but also your prayer concerning the descendants of your two sons, concerning two great nations. Therefore do not argue, and do not despair. You are not carrying a monstrosity or a devil, which you could have been afraid of as the result of the struggling in your womb. No, you are already the mother of two very great peoples."

Thus Rebecca prayed only for her own life and that of her son, and she obtains the life of two patriarchs and of their descendants. She asks for a trifle and obtains a mountain of gold. This she had not had the courage either to hope for or to believe. For she wanted her prayer to be modest and satisfied with a modicum, just as we usually press for small and trivial things and do not consider with what a great Majesty we are speaking when we pray. For if God wanted to give only small and trivial things, He would not have prescribed such a great and magnificent form of prayer (Matt. 6:9 ff.): "Our

Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come, etc." God is not a Euclio or some Irus,57 but He puts before us and offers us immense riches and the best gifts in heaven and on earth. These He wants us to ask for and to expect; for in every petition—"Hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done. Give us this day our daily bread, etc."—heaven and earth and everything that is in them are comprised. For what does it mean that His name is hallowed, that His kingdom comes, and that His will is done? It means to overthrow countless devils and to swallow the entire world with one prayer. But our courage is small, and our faith is weak. Therefore we should carefully note this example and learn how God is not content with a little, even though we ask for very little; but He gives more than we understand or have the courage to ask for (Eph. 3:20).

But let us look at the words of the patriarch Shem. They comprise four statements, which we shall first take only in their legal sense. In the first place, he says: "Two nations are in your womb." And before God they are already as great as they are destined to be. But when they have been born and have grown up, then they will be divided. The second part is the promise that Edom and Jacob will be two peoples divided according to the flesh, the Edomites and the Israelites, as Holy Scripture attests.

Yet, they will not be under one head, but each will have his own glory as the ruler of his own people.

They will also have established households, governments, and churches; but there will be some difference. For they will be divided into diverse religions, governments, rights, and laws. It is believable that Esau brought with him from Abraham's house circumcision and some sacrificial rites.

Thus his people had its own government, rights, and church. But Jacob received a special arrangement of the government and the church—there was nothing like it in the world—and at the same time the succession and the inheritance of the promise. Consequently, those nations will be separated politically and so far as the church is concerned, this was also fulfilled physically. But Paul has the spiritual interpretation in the Epistle to the Romans. About this, however, something is said elsewhere. The last two clauses are: "The one shall be stronger than the other, the elder shall serve the younger."

Edom, or Esau, increased very much, as we shall see later on when he meets his brother Jacob with 400 men and Jacob had no one with him except his four wives. And in the thirty-sixth chapter the 11 chiefs who possessed the land of Edom are enumerated. From this one can conclude that the power of Esau was very great. But Jacob was still wandering about in the land of Canaan and was sojourning in Egypt, while meanwhile 11 grand children and great chiefs had been born to his brother. Therefore that prophecy was also fulfilled literally. But at the time of David, Israel, the younger, increased, occupied kingdoms, and also subjected Edom to himself, as is stated in Ps. 60:8: "Upon Edom I cast

My shoe." But below, in the blessing of Esau, Isaac will explain and mitigate this promise by stating that this bondage will last up to a definite time; for this is what he says (Gen. 27:40): "The time will come when you will throw off and break his yoke from your neck." This happened at the time of Ahab, when Edom revolted and chose its own king.

This, then, is the essence of the promise and the bountiful manner in which Rebecca's prayer is heard; for this is how Shem comforted her: "Behold, my dear Rebecca, you have prayed for yourself, and the only thing you longed for was the safety of your child. But I am promising you far greater

- 185 things. You will have not only one child, but you will have two sons and the princes of two peoples.

Besides, God is indicating to you the rank and condition of each, in order that you may know what kind of descendants you will have even after your death. The one will be stronger in the matter of government and religion, and the other will be weaker; but the smaller people will remain the heir and lord. The stronger will not altogether suppress the weaker. Indeed, the latter will rule over the former.

Consequently, you are not only keeping your person and your sons safe and unharmed, but you also have a description of the history of both parts to all their descendants without end."

Thus this is written for our instruction and comfort, in order that we may learn to pray with full confidence and not to despair or have any doubt about being heard. Although prayer is offered contrary to and beyond understanding, yet it is not unavailing; for God does not want us to insult Him by thinking that He is not truthful. And this is why He has told us to pray. He has not only commanded us to do so; but He has also promised that He will hear, in order that we might maintain with assurance that He wants to grant what we are asking for. Therefore it is the highest type of religion and worship to believe that God is truthful. Besides, we have a simple and definite form in which He has prescribed what we should pray for and how this should be done. Therefore if you pray: "Our Father, etc.," think:

"Thou, O Lord, hast told me to pray and hast promised that Thou wilt hear him who prays." Nor should you have any doubts about God's truth and promises. Even if the devil were to overturn the entire world in a single moment, the name of God will nevertheless be hallowed. And even if we all had to die, yet we are undoubtedly preserved and watched over for the future resurrection. Indeed, we see the manifest power and efficacy of our prayer; for the government of the world is surely preserved through prayer, our life is preserved, and all the good things we enjoy in this world are preserved.

Furthermore, in Rom. 9:10 ff. St. Paul treats this passage in a rather sublime manner and relates it to the spiritual and true account. There he quotes from the prophet Malachi (1:2–3): "I have loved

Jacob, but I have hated Esau." In Rom. 9:12–13 he says: "Because of His call she was told: 'The elder will serve the younger.' " There Paul is not dealing with the temporal promises. No, he is dealing with the true promises. The Jews understand these words only according to the flesh, as when they occupied the land of Canaan after they had been led out of Egypt. But in those physical promises those that are spiritual are included. For from that weak part the Son of God had to be born, in order that salvation might not be from the Gentiles and from the Edomites but might be from the Jews, as is stated in John 4:22. Everything has been written on account of Christ, who came from that line of the smaller people. Accordingly, Paul treats this passage by establishing a twofold birth, namely, of the flesh and of the promise. Esau, too, was a son of the promise. But there a separation and division into a larger people and a smaller people takes place. There Paul, in accordance with his great and apostolic spirit, gives the interpretation that the smaller will be the heir, namely, Jacob, not the greater. Thus all the others who adhere to the promise also become heirs, as has been stated above at greater length.

Accordingly, the promise that pertains to the body belongs to Esau; but that which pertains to the spirit belongs to Jacob, who was Rebecca's smaller son according to the flesh but the lord and the greater son according to the spirit.

I have stated about the church of Cain and the church of Ishmael that they were rejected, but in such a way that the rejection would lead to their humiliation, in order that they might relinquish the inheritance which they presumed they would have as a result of their flesh. Yet they were saved through repentance and through faith in the promise. Thus the text gives evidence that many descendants of Edom were saved, not because they were the children of Edom—for that line was rejected—but because they took hold of the promise by faith, in accord with Paul's statement (Rom.

9:8): "It is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise."

Accordingly, they joined the Ishmaelites and said: "Sarah is our grandmother, and Abraham is our ancestor. But this will not save me, for the carnal procreation is of no benefit at all. But I believe in the Seed promised to the fathers, just as Isaac and Jacob believed and were saved." All who had this faith obtained the inheritance of eternal life, but of those descendants who persisted in presuming that they were greater because of the flesh all perished.

We Gentiles cannot glory as the Turk glories in his kingdoms or the pope in the orderly succession and the supreme power in the church. No, we glory in what is written in John 1:12–13: "But to all who received Him, who believed in His name, He gave power to become children of God; who were born,

- 186 not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God." We must all come to this knowledge, just as in Rom. 4:12 Paul calls Abraham the father of the circumcised, "who are not merely circumcised but also follow the example of the faith which our father Abraham had before he was circumcised." Thus Christ says in John 8:39: "If you were Abraham's children, you would do what Abraham did"; for he believed God, and through the promised Seed he obtained righteousness and salvation. Thus those who believe God become children of Abraham and children of God.

Hence we should learn from this passage that all glowing in the flesh has been rejected and condemned by God, and that we cannot be justified through it, just as the fathers were not justified because of the glow of the flesh or blood, as this example, which is altogether outstanding and deserves to be written in golden letters, demonstrates with power.

Furthermore, these two brothers struggled in the womb; and later on, after they had been born, they quarrel throughout the entire time of their life. Thus we continually contend with the pope and the Turk, and it is everlastingly impossible for us to have fellowship or peace with them. Ishmael and Edom—that is, those who are older and stronger, who surpass us in wealth, power, numbers, and wisdom—oppose us, who are younger and weaker. But this is our comfort. Since we have to struggle and wage a truceless58 war with the Edomites, we are sure of victory; for without a doubt the Word, or the promise, will prevail. But if some of our adversaries are saved, they are not saved because they are papists, monks, or Turks, but because they come to us, that is, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And although they are not of our seed, yet they are grafted into it. Thus not the entire mass is rejected, but only the glory and pride of the mass, which glories in its fathers, in ceremonies, and in the Law. And if it wants to be engrafted together with us, it will be a holy mass together with us and with the entire generation of the godly, but as a result of grace, not as a result of the righteousness of the flesh and of works, in which the world seeks salvation and righteousness.

24. When her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins in her womb.

25. The first came forth red, all his body like a hairy mantle; so they called his name Esau.

26. Afterward his brother came forth, and his hand had taken hold of Esau's heel; so his name was called Jacob.

This is the description of the amazing and dangerous birth on account of which the mother undoubtedly was exceedingly frightened when the fetuses were struggling so in her womb. For the birth is described as such a one that if the promise had not preserved Rebecca, she would have died suddenly in childbirth. I surely had no understanding of this; nor have I ever read or heard of a similar example. This is what the text says: Twins were found when she began to give birth, for the women who were at hand were expecting only one child. But soon, as they are looking on, they realize that there are twins. It certainly is common that twins are born, even without danger to the mother. But here the danger is great, since Jacob comes out immediately after Esau is born, and comes out in such a way that he takes hold of his brother's heel with his hand. Moreover, we know that it is an unfortunate and difficult birth when an infant is not brought forth properly and the head comes out first. But when one hand or foot has been thrust out, the life of mother and child are endangered.

Often, too, the fetus is torn to pieces and brought out bit by bit. Thus this passage describes a birth that is wonderful and full of danger to the mother and to Jacob. The first child comes out safely, but the life of the second is in danger. It was the promise, however, that preserved Rebecca—the promise in which she had heard that she would give birth to two peoples, or to the founders of two peoples. For this reason she does not despair in such great peril.

Furthermore, Moses describes each infant. The first came out ינמֹו ִִדַאְ. From this word Adam gets his name, because he was formed from red earth, which Pliny and Josephus maintain is the best.59

After it black earth is praised, but yellow and pale yellow earth are inferior. ֱא דֹום means red. In this case, however, there must have been an unusual redness; for all infants are usually born red and are also red after their birth. But Esau was especially red in comparison with his brother or other infants.

Then he has another mark to distinguish him from his brother; for he is shaggy and hairy, not only on his head—just as other infants, and especially males, have much hair—but in addition to the redness

Esau also has a rough and completely hairy skin. On his hands and feet and on his entire body he is shaggy, for Moses adds the comparison "like an ֶּרֶּר ֶר תאַ." This is surely an amazing description of the - 187 red and shaggy infant; and in spite of the fact that the accounts of the heathen have often commented on unusual births, they hardly have anything like it.

The Hebrew word denotes a shaggy skin or man fie like the garment of Elijah described in 2 Kings 2:8. This was a hairy mantle with which he struck the Jordan, so that the waters were divided. And in Joshua 7:21 we read: "I saw among the spoil רעָנְשֶּרֶּר ֶר ת ִׁא״. ַ Here this is called רעָשֵׂ. I do not know, however, whether at that time people made garments from wool. This kind, I suppose, was a garment made of skin, beautiful and long like a mantle or toga, which was the dress of the prophets. It can also be understood as a hyperbole, just as in our language we have comparisons of this kind when we speak of those who have disheveled and shaggy hair as being similar to hedgehogs, wie ein Igel oder ein hareul. Thus the women, too, could have spoken about Esau in their customary way of resorting to exaggerations in the household.

After Esau has been born, the birth of Jacob is described. He is in danger both of his own and of his mother's life. For he follows his brother so quickly that he grasps him by the heel. And one may imagine that they were brought forth almost in one moment. Therefore these are wonderful things.

One finds nothing like them in any historical accounts. For it is simply and truly a divine work which God is performing here. And for this reason Moses is so painstaking in these descriptions. He wants every happening to be carefully noted, in order that the reader may be spurred on to take the importance of these matters into consideration.

Here the foundations of the entire Christian doctrine are confirmed. Through the birth of these twins God wants to pass sentence in advance on the entire world, yes, even to anticipate and put an end to all righteousnesses of the flesh. He wants to teach that all wisdom and excellence of the flesh is lost and vain by reason of this one statement: "The elder shall serve the younger." Hence this is no discussion about kingdoms and empires of the world. Much less is it a discussion of mere trifles60 or of old wives' tales. No, these words lay the foundations of our doctrine and powerfully support them, namely, that before God the flesh is dead and condemned, but the spirit is made alive. And sin and original depravity are hinted at, lest anyone trust in the flesh instead of in the Lord and His promises.

This cannot be stated and impressed enough; for those are most profound judgments of God, and they are God's unsearchable ways. I am not speaking about the judgments of God a priori, which He has with Himself in His innermost and secret counsels: why He deliberates, acts, rules, saves, destroys, etc., in this way or another. No, I am speaking about God a posteriori, as He calls, speaks, and manifests Himself, just as He says to Moses (Ex. 33:23): "You shall see My back." For here indeed we see such ways and such judgments as man does not comprehend, just as is stated in 1 Cor. 2:14: "The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God; for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them," so that even the saints do not understand what they are asking for. To this extent those judgments and ways of God are unsearchable for us a posteriori, that is, when He calls and manifests Himself by means of the Word and an outward work. But if those things are not comprehensible, how shall we comprehend these, when He is hidden for us within Himself and in His divinity? Thus you have enough trouble and pains to understand God when He is working and calling, and there is no need for you to search and explore secrets and things that are too high for your comprehension.

Is it not the utmost blindness of the human flesh that it is so deeply offended by this example of the judgment of God, namely, that Esau, the first-born, must not be the heir, but that Jacob, who is the younger and was born after him, must have the inheritance? This you will never comprehend with your human reason, although you hear Him calling and crying aloud those words of His, yes, even destroying kings and kingdoms of the world because of them. Nevertheless, such reasoning will lead to condemnation of this judgment of God, which says: "The elder shall serve the younger." You will never persuade the Turk that he is condemned before God; nor will you persuade the pope that the Roman See is the see of Satan; nor will you persuade Charles V, Ferdinand, and the king of France.

For the flesh, that is, the older, is arrogant, prevails, and is everything, as it were, in the world. On the other hand, the spirit is sad, dead, and altogether nothing. Thus Esau thinks: "I am the first-born.

Therefore I am the church. I am the son and the people of God. But Jacob has been cast aside without - 188 honor and name." In like manner, we are finding out today that our adversaries arrogate the title

"church" to themselves, even though they are anything but the church.

Esau, then, is the first-born, and Jacob is born later. But God inverts the order and says: "The flesh is proud, but the spirit is sad. Nevertheless, the flesh is falsehood; but the spirit is truth." For every human being is not only a liar but is also φίλαυτος (2 Tim. 3:2). He always convinces himself, takes for granted that he knows better, and despises and hates this doctrine. Begin from the beginning of the world, and consider in order the examples of all ages. Cain, the first-born, is the lord; Abel is the servant. The kingdom of Egypt is the flower of the world, and yet it is the clung of the devil. Next the kingdom of the Assyrians, of the Babylonians, of the Greeks, and of the Romans rules.61 The Israelites and the people of God, even of the New Testament, are oppressed by a very harsh bondage. This is recorded in opposition to the invincible pride of the flesh, in order that we may know how we should conduct ourselves in such great diversity of fortune, and how we can retain firm judgment and steadfast and dauntless courage for bearing adversity. If I see the Turk or the pope in their greatest majesty, I shall say: "You are without the Word. The Word is not with you. Therefore you may glory as much as you can, and you may be more powerful than even all the angels. Nevertheless, you are condemned, because the flesh, or the elder, shall serve the younger."

But the Turk and the followers of the pope retort: "What does the Word matter? What do Elijah, Elisha, Luther, and Philip matter? I have kingdoms, riches, power, vigor, a fine appearance, and wisdom, things in which the entire world takes pride and by means of which it rules. Hence I am blessed and am the people of God. But you are wretched and afflicted. Therefore you are cast aside by God." In opposition to this very great stumbling block we say: "We hear God, who calls, manifests

Himself, and declares: 'The elder must be the younger'; that is, the flesh, which rules, must become a servant; and the spirit, which serves, must become lord." This is our glory. Of course, it is laughed at by the world and by the powerful of this age, just as Cain dominated at the very beginning and Abel served. Yet Cain is cast aside, but Abel lives. Thus the Assyrians and the Babylonians dominated and devastated Judea, Jerusalem, and the temple. Thus the Persians ruled and the Jews were captives.

Nevertheless, the Jews remained; but the others perished completely. Thus the Romaus exercised sovereignty in an arrogant manner; but the apostles were exiles and fugitives. They hungered, thirsted, were naked, and were like men destined for death (1 Cor. 4:9 ff.). Today the Turk rules and the Christians serve, the pope is arrogant and the church mourns. Nevertheless, the pope will fall and be killed by the Spirit of the mouth of Christ. "It is indeed true," says God. "The world is the elder, and the church and my people are the younger; but I decree that the eider will be the younger, and, on the other hand, the younger will be the elder."

This is the doctrine of faith, hope, comfort, and of love toward God and men. There is no other difference except that here in the church God is calling, but there in the world and among the ungodly

God is silent. The Turk does not have even one letter to prove that what he is doing is being done justly. No God is there who calls. Thus the pope and the emperor hear nothing but are in silence. But we have God, who calls because He has disclosed Himself to us, so that we have a visible, perceptible, and available God. We have the Word, Baptism, the Keys. Still we suffer. It is good. Let us suffer indeed. But the servants will be lords. On the other hand, we shall remain; but they will perish. Our descendants, who are truly ours, will also remain here on earth, just as some prophets have continually remained ever since the beginning of the world (Luke 1:70) and, as though by a hereditary right, have handed down to us the Word of God.

God wanted to present this evidence to the entire world, and He wanted to confirm it with this account. Therefore we should not read it listlessly, as though it were some secular account. Otherwise it is wholly trivial, bare, and dull, as though I were reading some story about the birth or the deeds of the Turkish emperor. By a special plan God wanted to point out His teaching in this example and to manifest His work in those two brothers, in order that we might see how the elder will serve the younger. Esau is the first-born, and on this account he proudly puts on airs. He is a Chaldean,

Babylonian, Persian, Greek, and Roman emperor; in short, he is the pope and the lord of lords. But he does not have the God who calls. No, he has the God who condemns him with these words: "The elder will serve," even though he does not believe these words. But Jacob has Him who calls and assigns the rule over the eider. But he is not powerful, wise, and holy. Nevertheless, since he has been called, he

- 189 will rule. Thus the prophets have carefully unfolded this and have derived manifold comfort from it, as Is. 41:14 states: "Fear not, you worm Jacob."

God wanted to point this out at the very moment of his birth. Esau comes out first; he is Edom, red and shaggy. The other has a smooth skin and is not unusually red. On him nothing stands out as extraordinary. But Esau, who is the first, must be extraordinary in comparison with his brother through two very great signs; and not only his parents but also the friends and neighbors who are present unanimously called him Esau, since they were impressed by these two signs. For human reason cannot conclude otherwise than that Esau will be the heir because he is the first-born and is distingnished by two very outstanding marks, namely, redness and hairiness. Moreover, he gets the name from working or doing, as though they were saying: "This will be the man who will do everything admirably and will be what is popularly called a factotum," just as Cain got his name from the fact that his mother thought that she had obtained the man whom God had promised as the Victor over sin and the serpent.62 This is surely how the world is when it forms an opinion about those very important matters,

Therefore let us judge better about the judgments of God, which are foolishness before the world; for the world itself is Esau and the factotum, just as the Turk and the pope are Esau. But we are spurned and despised. Yet in the Word and in the call these things can be separated.

Moreover, they have three reasons for praising Esau so highly. In the first place, he is the firstborn. In the second place, he is the child that was waited for with a great longing during 20 years and was obtained through many prayers. In the third place, he is red and shaggy. All these things bring it about that they all promise themselves something extraordinary from that infant, contrary to the decree of God.

Thus we are wont to interpret the signs which are against us, and by which God threatens the ungodly, in the opposite way, as though they were favorable to us. We flatter and comfort ourselves, as though no misfortune could happen to us. Thus the Jews understood it in the most favorable way when, before the destruction of Jerusalem, the temple was opened at night without a hand, which was a sign that the city would be destroyed together with the temple, and that the heathen would enter the temple without any hindrance.63 They kept on saying: "The Lord will now be with us; He is coming to us of His own accord." To this extent our reason is fond of itself, and whatever good is said it applies to itself. For example, if anyone is praised, it assumes that this is being said most truthfully of itself.

To this extent man is his own worst sycophant and a Gnatho.64 From signs that portend evil we infer good things, and we assign the evil things to other people.

Thus these two signs, namely, being red and shaggy—which they suppose were given to glorify the first-born—are decidedly unfavorable. For in Holy Scripture redness denotes bloodthirsty justice, but shagginess denotes cruelty, just as, on the other hand, brightness, light, and whiteness have a good meaning. Here, therefore, the birth itself points out that all who are of the blood are relentlessly bloodthirsty and cruel without compassion. Furthermore, a shaggy skin is deceptive and denotes hypocrisy.

These are surely very bad signs and contrary to reason. Therefore it interprets them to its own advantage and in a more favorable way.

Moreover, let us note that on the body of Satan there are shaggy and detestable hypocrites, because a shaggy skin is a mendacious skin. But a natural skin should not be rough. Furthermore, the red color pertains to homicides. These two portents—namely, falsehood and homicide—are in the church and on the body of the devil. Yet those people do not recognize these signs but glory in their righteousness and compassion. Thus Christ says in John 16:2: "Whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God." Therefore he who kills Christ and those who are His does not seem shaggy and red, does he? Indeed, he seems exceedingly white, like the sun, and more brilliant than all the stars.

Nothing shaggy is apparent in the hypocrites. Indeed, here one sees righteousness at its best, religious devotion, and truth. Therefore one should note carefully that Esau carries with him the true and characteristic signs of the church of the devil, as whose head he is described. But Jacob, the other child, is not red; he is smooth and white.

In this manner God has embellished this account not only with promises but also with signs, in order to strengthen this conviction that the flesh is subject to death and the devil, however powerful and grand it may be, and no matter if it is a thousand times greater than the Turk and all kingdoms. But Jacob and those who are really godly in the world are nothing. The others are everything. But the - 190 difference is this: Among us there is the Word; on the other side there is silence. Moreover, God calls into existence the things that do not exist (Rom. 4:17); and He destroys into nothingness the things that exist. For the Word of God is greater than countless worlds. Therefore it is not without a special plan that God has presented these two very clear signs to strike the eyes and ears of all people. Esau is the deed and work that God has done. We are not Esau; we are absolutely nothing. But this account teaches the opposite and gives us powerful confirmation that all the things of the world and of Esau are nothing, but that the Word of God alone is everything.

One should also note in this passage, when Isaac does not immediately understand the signs and the birth of his sons in accordance with the meaning of the promise, that the saints do not learn or understand everything at one time and suddenly. Thus above, too, we heard that Abraham and Sarah were compelled to make progress and advance, and did not immediately have a perfect understanding of God's promise. Accordingly, experience enables the saints to progress from clarity to clarity.

Abraham kept thinking that he would have offspring from Sarah. But when he sees that she is exhausted and barren on account of her age, he marries Hagar; and he regards her as the mother of the Seed until, as a result of the Holy Spirit's interpretation, the promise is explained anew to the effect that Sarah will be the mother of the Promised Seed. Thus from day to day the fathers were trained and made progress more and more, as Peter admonishes in 2 Peter 3:18: "Grow in the grace, etc." They did not arrive immediately at perfect and complete understanding, but varied practice and experience, various trials and perils, instructed them. Thus here Isaac and Rebecca heard that there would be two peoples and that the elder would serve the younger. Then they reasoned in this manner: "He who is the first-born is undoubtedly the older." And they think that the war has already been brought to an end in the mother's womb. For this reason they name the first child Esau, that is, maker or doer of all things, as though they were saying: "Jacob should have been the elder, but in accordance with God's decree he was overcome in the womb by his brother, who came out first and was distinguished by these two signs." For this reason it is not stated about Jacob: "They called his name," as the first-born is called

Esau in accordance with the common consent of all; but his father named him. And he has his name from the sole, as though you called him one who trips up another's heels or treads underfoot.

Nevertheless, it is more the expression of a wish than a statement of fact.65 The name Esau is a statement of fact and not the expression of a wish; he will do these things. But because Jacob, who was the elder in the womb, became the younger at the birth and was over-come by the elder, the father thought: "God grant that you may become one who trips up, just as it is apparent up to this time from your posture that you wanted to trip up the elder, since you took hold of his heel. But the voice of God has reversed this." Therefore it was the father's wish that Jacob be what he wanted, namely, one who treads underfoot, not his first-born brother and the victor, of course, but the heathen and other nations.

This, I believe, is how Isaac understood the promise and the birth of his two sons at first. For the fathers were not so holy and perfect as the monks dream about Augustine and other saints, who, as they imagine, were altogether perfect. And it is an example which proves that the saintly fathers grew in knowledge, just as all godly persons must continually grow. On this account God permitted them to fall and to go astray, in order that we might know that knowledge, faith, and love remained imperfect in them, just as later on the very serious fall of Isaac will be described.

Examples of this kind teach us that one should not believe any human being, no matter how saintly he may be, but must pay attention to Him who calls and to His Word. But one should not study the Word for only a year or two, for the Word of God is a boundless subject. Our adversaries exclaim:

"Ambrose, Augustine taught this or that!" But they are of no importance to us unless they bring the voice of Christ. Whoever of them has the Word and that voice in greater clarity, I would rather follow him than I would want to follow Augustine or anyone else. Thus Augustine teaches Holy Scripture more clearly and discusses it more skillfully than Ambrose. Therefore it is more profitable to read him than Ambrose. But in regard to all let us always hold fast to the following words: "Thy Word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path" (Ps. 119:105); and 2 Peter 1:19 states: "We have the prophetic Word made more sure. You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts."

- 191 For nothing can be learned so perfectly and completely as it is perfect and pure in itself, for the carnal mind still clings to us. It must be purged by means of trials, in order that the light may become clearer and clearer.

Isaac was sixty years old when she bore them.

27. When the boys grew up, Esau was a skillful hunter, a man of the field, while Jacob was a quiet man, dwelling in tents.

Moses mentions Isaac's age in order to point out and commend the very pure chastity in which this man lived with Rebecca for 20 years. Then it is also pointed out how they waited for offspring for so long a time, to the point of despair. Thus the very saintly spouses were trained by many trials. They were not idle or in a frenzy in regard to lust, as the lazy race of men of this last age today usually is.

They were also foreigners, and they had nothing of their own; but they wandered here and there in great patience and humility, as has been stated above about Abraham. All these matters belong here.

But at this time Abraham was still living. He lived in association with these grandsons for 15 years, but his life was far shorter than that of the rest of the patriarchs. Moreover, I have no doubt that the boys had outstanding natural qualities; for both were brought up and taught by Abraham himself to obey and respect not only their parents but also the patriarchs. Perhaps Abraham was also the interpreter of this promise and, together with the others, wanted Esau to become the elder on account of the victory given to him by God in the womb when he had been the younger. He did not understand or see more, because he died before becoming acquainted with the character and inclinations of the two boys.

Now, however, Holy Scripture begins to hasten to point out the difference between these two brothers and to make clear which one of these two is really the elder and the lord. It does so in order that this promise may be understood: "One nation shall be stronger than the other" and "The elder shall serve the younger." After they have grown up, that separation begins, and each of the two is known by his inclinations, as the ancient little line has it: "Just as the twig is bent the tree's inclined."66

For at that time there was no doubt that Esau is the first-born, that the promise pertains to him because he is the elder, and that he should rule, but that Jacob, as the younger, should serve. But this is a description of the two brothers by antithesis. Esau is described in this manner because by his own fault and deserts he deprived himself of precedence and would soon be the younger. Jacob, on the other hand, would get possession of the rule and of precedence. For Esau is a skillful hunter and a man of the field. That lord, maker, and doer, you see, is smug and puffed up on account of his primogeniture, and little by little he falls away from the promise and the Spirit into the glory of the flesh. For he hears that he is the priest and lord. This leads immediately to contempt for his brother and the spiritual gifts, and the pride of the flesh follows. Jacob, on the other hand, is modest, humble, quiet, and forthright.

He is not excessively proud and does not seek glory. He is the sack-bearer and the water carrier.67 This is the beginning of Esau's horrible fall and a picture of the entire world, which in this manner falls from the Spirit into the flesh. For they despise what is moderate, humble, sorrowful, dangerous, and subject to annoyance and inconveniences; they seek glory, peace, riches, and the friendship of the mighty.

But at first Esau is not aware of his fall. He does not notice it until he is deprived of the blessing.

Meanwhile he is arrogant, does not concern himself about or honor his father, takes a wife from the Canaanites, and takes for granted too confidently that he cannot lose such great blessings. All hypocrites and presumptuous persons always have this practice, as Ps. 10:11 states: "He thinks in his heart 'God has forgotten, He has hid His face, He will never see it.' " About the godly they say: "They are heretics and cursed; we are the children of the kingdom; we are the church and the people of God."

Thus at all times all heretics and all adversaries of the Word are completely sure and confident in God's favor. Indeed, this vice is so widespread that it cannot be expressed in words. Thus at first the Sacramentarians used to cry out: "It is the most certain truth." For all those people are puffed up by the success of the flesh and the things the flesh seeks, such as glory, greatness, and popular applause. They are offended by the foolishness and weakness the Spirit. Therefore Esau also arrogated to himself the episcopate and supreme government in the church of Abraham. But he did not pay much attention to obeying his mother, as Jacob did; for it seemed servile to obey his mother in the case of those trivial household activities that belonged to the servants and to Jacob. He thought: "I am lord; Jacob must

- 192 fetch water. I am lord in both estates of society.68 Jacob is my servant." Therefore he is completely smug and chooses a kind of life that is not irksome or difficult but pleasant and showy. "Esau," says

Moses, "was a skillful hunter, a man of the field"—not by being a farmer in the field, although he undoubtedly had land and possessions; but this is an antithetical comparison of the pursuits of each of the two brothers. Esau occupied himself in the fields with hunting, riding horseback, and waging war.

What did Jacob do? He was forthright and irreproachable, and he lived in the tents. War ein mann, der sich fein still hielt.

But it is impossible that Esau did not also lapse into many other vices. Even if a hunter avoids other crimes and sins, he nevertheless often sins by becoming indignant and cursing in a wicked manner when everything does not go as he feels in his heart that it should go; and when we are surrounded by the glory of the flesh, we are in certain danger. Therefore the psalm (62:10) warns the rich: "If riches increase, set not your heart on them." And Job declares about himself (31:24): "If I have made gold my trust, or called fine gold my confidence, etc."; that is, I did not take pride in the abundance of gold and riches, and I did not despise others. Likewise (v. 17): "If I have eaten my morsel alone, and the fatherless has not eaten of it, etc." Consequently, riches are fraught with danger.

In the Gospel they are called thorns and the unrighteous mammon (Luke 16:11); and if the Holy Spirit is not there, a rich man is not among the number of those who mourn but goes along in his affluence and most certainly lapses into arrogance aria into contempt for God and men, makes flesh his arm, and worships mammon instead of God. Thus wealth becomes an idol. Therefore Christ says: "You cannot serve God and mammon" (Matt. 6:24). And there is an old German saying: "Gold makes bold" (cf.

Eccl. 41:26). But this is not the fault of riches; it is the fault of the flesh, which is arrogant and despises others.

In the second place, over and beyond that pride and idolatry, the flesh adds theft and rapine, namely, when it does not follow the example of Job and does not share its possessions with the poor, does not clothe the naked, and does not perform other duties of love. For the flesh loves and watches over its riches to such an extent that not even the rich themselves enjoy them. First, therefore, the rich become idolaters contrary to the First Table. Secondly, they become unrighteous toward their neighbor, robbers, and thieves; for they should give to the poor yet do not give. Some do give, but with the condition that they regard those who receive as under obligation to themselves; that is, they give grudgingly and haughtily, not with a guileless eye but in order that they may be honored and praised.

Hence it is exceedingly difficult for a rich person to be righteous and godly, because idolatry and contempt for one's brother are associated with wealth. Furthermore, the rich often do not refrain from manifest villainies; they plot against the property of others, do violence to orphans, and rob not only by omission but also by commission. Consequently, there are graspers and usurers. Their offenses are punishable even according to civil laws. But I am speaking only of those rich people who refrain from actual theft—that is, theft of commission—and commit theft of omission—that is, when they do not give to the poor, do not acknowledge that riches are gifts of God, and are not grateful. This is characteristic of all the rich if the Holy Spirit is not there, as He was in Job, in David, and in other godly kings, all of whom had an abundance of wealth. But David says (Ps. 62:10): "If riches increase, set not your heart on them."

Besides, the common danger for rich people is the sin of omission, when they do not come to the aid of the poor and needy, even though God has sternly commanded (Is. 58:7): "Share your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into your house." If you do not do this, you will hear that sad verdict (Luke 12:48): "Everyone to whom much is given, of him will much be required."

Consequently it is very dangerous to be rich.

And in Is. 53:9 the rich are regarded as ungodly, because without the Holy Spirit, godliness, and faith there is no difference between a rich person and an ungodly one. The ungodly person robs God of His glory, does not give thanks to God, and then refuses aid to the poor. A rich person who is without faith does the same thing. Therefore he is ungodly.

Thus Esau's primogeniture causes him to strive eagerly for the glory of the flesh, for power, and for wisdom. He refuses to be satisfied with a menial state, as his brother Jacob is. He chooses the pursuit of hunting and riding, in which he could not engage without sin—even of commission— especially in the case of hunting, just as our princes sin not only by omission on their hunts but also

- 193 most gravely by commission.69 They ruin the crops and fields for the farmers, who are not permitted to drive the wild animals in any manner from their gardens or fields. But the animals run riot with impunity and destroy the fields that have been tilled with great toil. There not only help and defense cease, but damage is also inflicted on those who should be helped. Consequently, the Turk or another hunter will eventually come and wrest from the princes of Germany both their nets and their hunting spears.

I am saying this in order that we may know that hunting is not without great sins. In fact, many have debated the question whether hunting is proper or right. In itself, of course, it is not evil, and it can be pursued in a manner that is godly and good, as we see in the case of the most illustrious ruler of Saxony, Elector Frederick. He used to hunt in such a manner that he harmed nobody but rather benefited many. If at any time he noticed that even a little damage had been done, he paid doubly for it. He often even distributed to the peasants some measures of grain to compensate them for what the wild animals would consume. This is worthy of a good and estimable prince; for we do not want to deprive the princes of their royal prerogatives, as the peasants were attempting to do in the revolt that took place in the year 1525.

Besides, it is the purpose of hunting to keep the more ferocious animals—wolves, bears, boars—at a distance and to protect human beings and beasts of burden. Hunting should be done in such a manner that sheep and other harmless animals are protected; for a ruler's duty obliges him to spare his subjects and to conquer the proud, as the poet says.70 Furthermore, the pleasure and delight granted to those who engage in hunting without harm to and ruin for their subjects is even honorable. But if hunting is carried on in any other way, it is very bad and is a harmful pursuit.

I am afraid, however, that because Esau is supposed to have been completely carnal, he often forgot his duty and was guilty of many sins of commission and omission. But because he is the firstborn and the specially beloved son of his father, he commits no sin whatever and does nothing wickedly or sinfully even when he does things that are sinful to the highest degree. But if he did sin to some extent, he undoubtedly concealed it from his father. He was able to do this, of course, since he was the ruler in the home and among the domestics.

Now let us also look at the second part of the antithesis: "While Jacob was a man םתָּ, dwelling in tents." All have translated םתָּ with "simple," "foolish," although the Hebrew text does not have this meaning. For םתָּ does not denote one who is simple in mind and intellect, that is, without ingenuity and industry. No, it denotes one who is simple, upright, blameless, and sincere in regard to his will.

The same word occurs in Ps. 119:1: "Blessed are the blameless." For, as is evident later on when he buys the birthright from his brother, Jacob is not dull. Lyra even explains it in this manner: "Without a trace of deceit, not simple on account of a lack of industry."71 Esau was not such a man; but in regard to his will he was far more unstable and cunning, because he married heathen wives and mingled with the Canaanites. Hunters are not blameless, but they often adapt their pursuits to the difference in the times, the situations, and the persons. Jacob, however, is simple and steadfast, is not influenced by persons and is not changed by events. Nevertheless, he is not foolish. This is a fine comparison.

In the second place, Jacob is not a man of the fields. He has no political and carnal pursuits— although affairs of state can be administered in a godly and proper manner—but he dwelt exclusively in tents; that is, he remained at home with his father and mother, and served them. Lyra tells what the Jews thought about the tents. I am in complete accord with what he has to say, because it is taken from the fathers. They say that tents not only for the households but also for the churches are meant. Thus one speaks of the tent of Moses and means a sacred tent. We call them churches and schools. But at that time there was no difference between the sacred tents and those occupied by households.

Abraham had in his tent a house of God and a church, just as today any godly and pious head of a household instructs his children and domestics in godliness. Therefore such a house is actually a school and church, and the head of the household is a bishop and priest in his house. Thus the tents in which Jacob dwelt were sacred, and there he sought first the kingdom of God (Matt. 6:33). Esau, on the other hand, sought the kingdom of the world. Therefore he lost both, namely, the worldly and the spiritual kingdom, because it is a general and perpetual rule that for those who seek first the kingdom of God the other things are added. On the other hand, to those who want to get their own advantages

- 194 and their daily bread before being concerned about the kingdom of God the opposite will happen; they will lose the kingdom of God together with the physical kingdom.

For a time, therefore, Jacob was younger and lower than his brother. But his heart and trust clung completely to God, and he was a pious and godly young man. He went to the church and schools often and gladly, learned the Word and good manners, and heard the addresses of the patriarch Shem and the others, just as the Jews have commented—and they got this from the fathers—that this passage should be understood of the tents of Shem and Eber, who were contemporaries of Jacob for 80 years.

Moreover, they were most saintly men; they burned with wonderful zeal for the Word of God and had a far greater concern for religion and the worship of God than we have. Yet we, too, shall properly call our houses and churches tents when someone has a church in his home and in it instructs his children and domestics in godliness and virtue. But the more fervent and vigorous the spirit with which the Word is treated, the more fruit it brings. Therefore the gloss of the Jews pleases me, and this is an outstanding example of a pious and godly young man who does not involve himself above all in secular affairs and carnal pursuits. Of course, he did not disregard these completely; but his first concern was to cling to the fathers—Shem, Shelah, and Eber. And on the basis of a computation of the years72 one concludes that Jacob was a contemporary of Eber for 80 years, of Shem for 46, and of Shelah for 23. With these fathers Jacob undoubtedly associated eagerly and reverently, especially with Eber; for Shem, who was exhausted by old age, commended the boy Jacob to the patriarch Eber.

Shem, you see, was the father of all the churches, as was stated above in the tenth chapter: "Shem, the father of all the children of Eber" (v. 21). For this reason the entire people and the whole church looked up to him in his extreme old age. But Eber took care of and taught the church, because he was able to bear the burden of governing it. Consequently, I gladly agree with the words of the Jews, or rather of the fathers, that Jacob was not only in the tent at home but also in the tents of others, especially with Eber and Shem.

Jacob refrained from marrying for almost 70 years. Esau, as the lord and a man who was altogether worldly, took Canaanite wives when he was 40 years old. All these circumstances indicate that Esau was excessively proud on account of his primogeniture, despised his brother, disdained the tents, and devoted himself completely to those equestrian pursuits and to hunting.

But this is not to be understood as meaning that Esau was never in the tents. On the contrary, he sometimes visited them with his brother and others, just as the hypocrites studiously resort to something like this and want to appear even saintlier and more righteous than those who are truly saintly and godly. Thus he was a hearer in his father's church, and now and then, for the fun of it, he visited the other churches in which Eber and Shelah taught. Secretly, however, he did not regard them highly, just as among us Christians for the most part despise the ministry and divine worship. "Why should I go to church?" they say, "After all, I can read at home." And in this way they start gradually with a loathing of the Word until they are involved in civil affairs and become completely irreligious.

But the godly should carefully remember that he who seeks the kingdom of God finds both, and that he who disdains the kingdom of God loses both. Therefore they should place Jacob's example before themselves for imitation and should diligently hear and learn the Word of God. Wherever this is taught, there one finds the tents of God; and everyone should be fully convinced that if first of all he has the Word of God, all things will then follow. For God existed before the founding of the world. He created everything through the Word. Therefore the Word of God makes and brings everything.

This, then, is the description of the two brothers. Holy Scripture praises and prefers Jacob in respect to religion and godliness; it praises and prefers Esau in respect to civil government, because he sought the rule of the world. And this is justly censured in him. There one can see how he turns aside and loses his primogeniture on account of his irreverence, but how Jacob gets it on account of his piety and godliness. From this we should learn first of all to seek the kingdom of God and not to disregard it in favor of the pursuits and desires of this world.

28. Isaac loved Esau, because he ate of his game; but Rebecca loved Jacob.

This part of the account is quite obscure, difficult, and involved; for Moses presents an amazing difference between the two brothers. Esau is loved by his father, but Jacob is loved by his mother; and this stems from the difference in the natures and interests of the brothers. For it is natural for all mothers to take pleasure in mild and unassuming dispositions and manners, because women who are

- 195 pious and honorable are by nature timid and gentle. Thus Peter (1 Peter 3:6) comforts them as the weaker and exhorts them not to be greatly afraid of any disturbance. And there is a natural difference between the dispositions of sons and daughters. Men are endowed with rather impetuous dispositions.

Daughters are more amiable and attach themselves to their parents in a gentle and pleasant manner.

Therefore Rebecca loved Jacob by nature because he had mild and pleasant manners and a kind, modest, and shy disposition. For he honored his mother with all respect, heard the Word and the sermons, and honored the saintly fathers. All this is wonderfully pleasing in young people and delightful to mothers. On the other hand, Rebecca was offended by Esau's disposition and by his rather uncouth and rough manners.

But just as mothers love sons who have a mild disposition more than they love those who are somewhat impetuous and bold, so fathers love sons who are a little livelier and more spirited and for this reason, it seems, will be more suited and more eager to manage affairs. And it is certainly fitting for sons to be livelier than daughters. Such a man was Esau, and Isaac was aware that for governing an alert and active mind was needed. Therefore he favored Esau's disposition.

Furthermore, over and above their nature each had something worthy of special73 commendation.

Jacob had an upright and unspoiled will, was saintly and very zealously devoted to godliness, and was fervent in his desire for the kingdom of God. This pleases his mother Rebecca, for she is a saintly and godly woman. For this reason she wishes Jacob to be the first-born, and, what was most important, that the promise be fulfilled, in order that the elder may serve the younger. In addition to his energetic and active disposition, Esau has a special talent for shooting with arrows, as has been stated above about Ishmael (21:20). This pleases his father as an appropriate adornment of his first-born, who must uphold the government.

For natural law, which is known to all nations,74 assigns the rule to the first-born. In civil law there is a different stipulation. But over and above the law of nature Esau also relied on the authority of the fathers and on the Law of God, according to which the first-born was the lord but the other brothers were servants. This is the difference in their pursuits and in the dissimilar love the parents had for the twins. Jacob's godliness commends him to the mother, but because of primogeniture the father has the reason for his favorable inclination from the Law of God. Yet the mother does not take primogeniture into consideration to the extent that she considers the line of descent and the inheritance of the promise

(Gen. 22:18): "In your Seed shall all the nations be blessed." This she especially desires to transfer to At this point a difficult question arises. I have already touched on it briefly. The promise clearly states: "The elder shall serve the younger." But everybody is agreed that Esau is the older, just as in the opinion of all Jacob is the younger. Consequently, if Isaac knew the promise according to which Jacob must be the elder, then he clearly sinned deliberately, wittingly, and perversely against God's plain promise. What are we going to say here? Even if he has on his side the Law of God, which makes lords of all the first-born, nevertheless God, the author of the Law, has the power to make exceptions from the Law. Therefore Isaac is not excused because he has the Law on his side; but he must give the primogeniture to Jacob and not to Esau, in accord with the promise. Thus he is terrified later on as though guilty of a sin when Jacob has snatched away the primogeniture.

Then another question arises. Did Isaac know about that promise or not? Nearly all treat this passage in such a manner that they seem to think that Rebecca kept this promise to herself and concealed it from her husband.75 For it is on this account that Isaac so steadfastly and wholeheartedly assigns the primogeniture to his son Esau and not to Jacob.

But I shall not readily agree with this. For above we heard how Isaac prayed in Rebecca's behalf and sent her to Shem. Consequently, it is not likely that Rebecca concealed that declaration, especially since she did not know at that time which of the two would come out first. Therefore I have no doubt that she shared with her husband the answer of Shem, who said that the older should serve the younger. But after their birth Isaac transfers to wicked Esau the primogeniture and the blessing which rightly belongs to his son Jacob. This is a very troublesome and difficult matter. That question is still undecided, and I do not see how we may settle it. But I would readily accede to the opinion that after Isaac had heard the declaration about the struggle of the two infants in the womb, he thought that it had to be understood in such a way that he who would come out first overcame the elder in the womb,

- 196 since he was the younger, that the struggle had been brought to an end in this way, and that the promise had been fulfilled. In the womb Jacob was the elder, but God's promise changed that order, so that Jacob, he who treads underfoot, became the younger and was born later.

These thoughts come to my mind about this question. Although I have neither the courage nor the desire to make a positive statement, yet it seems altogether probable and likely. I am influenced by the example of Ishmael, who, as Abraham believed, would be the heir when he still knew nothing about Isaac. He held fast to the statement made in the sixteenth chapter: "I will so greatly multiply your descendants that they cannot be numbered for multitude" (v. 10). At that time he did not understand the promise in any other way than that Ishmael would be the heir, because the promise is completely general and no clear and sure meaning can be gathered from it until God explained His statement.

"The promise," He said, "is not to be understood about Ishmael, as you think, but about Sarah and her son."

Thus Isaac seems to have been wholly of the opinion that the primogeniture rightly belonged to his son Esau. Nor was he disturbed by the fierceness of manners and disposition for which his mother was wont to find fault with Esau; he thought this was appropriate for the first-born, and future lord and ruler. And if there were some fault, he hoped that it would be corrected as Esau grew older and changed his pursuits for the better, and that he could accustom himself to some restraint. Indeed, I am pleased with this thought or conjecture about what Isaac did. But if his purpose was different, and if he intentionally and wittingly transferred the blessing to Esau, he cannot easily be excused, just as Rebecca cannot be excused either if she concealed that answer from her husband. Therefore one must take a middle course,

But because both persist so strongly in their opinion—for the husband's simply states the fact, while the mother's expresses a wish and is truer—people argue further that Rebecca, by special divine inspiration, had the understanding that the younger would be the elder. This I grant. Thus above Sarah also had the inspiration of the Spirit that her son Ishmael had to be east out. For it is not recorded or clearly commanded anywhere that he should be east out; but Sarah determines this on her own, because in Ishmael she detects many things that conflicted with the primogeniture and sees that he persecutes him who was born according to the promise. Thus Rebecca must have had an extraordinary inspiration—an inspiration which Isaac did not have.

But one should not accept any inspiration at all rashly and without a definite reason, for this is dangerous. The pope declares that the inspiration of nature is sometimes like a favor of the devil, and as an example of this he mentions the account of the temptations of Christ in Matt. 4:1 ff.76 But there is more truth in the statement that the devil can disguise himself as an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14) and change himself into the majesty of God. Therefore the Word of God must be added to that inspiration.

Thus Sarah's inspiration originates from the fact that she knows that she has the promise according to which she is the mother of the true Seed. Ishmael did not have this promise. Then she judges the tree from its fruits, because Ishmael persecutes her son and the true heir, seeks carnal things, and teaches idolatry. That inspiration is trustworthy.

Thus it is possible that Rebecca heard from the fathers: "Your son Esau is unmanageable and headstrong. Therefore he will not be the heir of the blessing. To be sure, he visits the temple or the tent; but he is not seriously affected by any zeal for godliness. Jacob, however, is godly and pious.

Therefore he is destined to become the elder." In this case there is added the example and the experience, for Esau is irreligious and becomes worse. Jacob, on the other hand, seeks the kingdom of heaven and grows in the fear of God and in other virtues. That inspiration is also good and sure.

Accordingly, we must always take pains to have a sure Word. Or even if the command of God does not always precede, one sees after the event what kind of inspiration there was. Thus David kills a lion, a bear, and Goliath; but the Spirit rushes upon him. This was an inspiration that was not seen until after the event. And such inspirations have the Word of God as their foundation; or even if they are without the Word at first, they are recognized later on and judged to have been from God. This is what has happened to us. We attacked the pope without a Word, but now we see that this was an inspiration of God without our knowledge and plan. But about this we shall speak elsewhere. Now

Rebecca plans farther how Jacob may acquire the primogeniture. Esau is completely smug and thinks - 197 he is out of all danger, since he is the first-born and the lord. But now follows the opportunity which causes him to lose the primogeniture altogether.

29. Once when Jacob was boiling pottage, Esau came in from the field, and he was famished.

30. And Esau said to Jacob: Let me eat some of the pottage, that red pottage; for I am famished!

(Therefore his name was called Edom.) Up to this point Moses has described the divergent pursuits the two brothers had. Esau was a man of the field and a hunter; that is, he concerned himself little about the pursuits of godliness, the sermons and teaching of the fathers who were still living. But what usually happens to everybody happened to him. When people are indifferent about small things, they gradually lose the greater things too. Esau considered it a small and unimportant matter that he was more indifferent in the pursuits of godliness than Jacob was, that he did not glow with zeal for the divine services and the knowledge and worship of God as Jacob did. But that indifference gradually grows and progresses to the point that he even despises his birthright. Next he falls into the smugness and arrogance which cause him to think he can deceive his brother with impunity, as though he had not sold his birthright in earnest. For he did not believe that the birthright could be transferred to his brother; he believed that it belonged rightfully to him, and he hopes that he will keep the blessing. He makes sport of his brother and thus becomes completely ungodly in his relation to God, to his fellowmen, and to his brother.

Such ungodliness and smugness follow when the Word of God is despised and is not made use of.

People become atheists, Epicureans, and bereft of reason. The examples of even very excellent people prove this. David was a very saintly man and most ardent in his worship of God. But how quickly he is driven to adultery, murder, and blasphemy! For to be asleep with regard to the Word of God is to open the window to the devil. Therefore we have been commanded to be watchful, as is written in 1 Peter

5:8: "Be sober, be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour." And Eph. 5:15 says: "Look carefully, then, how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of the time." Sluggishness and indifference in sacred matters have often resulted in the greatest lapses and in horrible sins.

Yes, even in wordly matters it is of the utmost importance to be vigilant and to pay heed to or neglect an opportunity. Thus the Turks watch carefully for all opportunities. For this reason they have won many victories over us in a short time. In the year 1532 our emperor had an opportunity near

Vienna to be brilliantly successful against the Turks; but since he neglected it, we are now looking in vain for other opportunities.77

Therefore let us accustom ourselves to wholehearted love for the First Table. If it is necessary to take the field or to assume some other responsibility, in the household or in the government, the kingdom of God should be our first and foremost concern. If this is disregarded, we see Esau falling so wretchedly that he never rises again. Jacob, on the other hand, prospers and becomes the firstborn because of a very favorable opportunity. Esau has the name and the glory of being the first-born, but meanwhile he falls suddenly and horribly and is deprived of all glory and honor. Therefore do not sleep; but be very attentive to all opportunities, lest you lose your gifts and the kingdom of God because of your negligence. For this reason Scripture has set this example before us, not as a cold and dead story but for our instruction and to remind us of the state of affairs and persons as it exists in all ages.

The Holy Spirit wants us to keep those two brothers before our eyes continually and to consider them a daily proverb, for at all times we are either Esauires or Jacobites. In outward appearance Esau is saintlier and more religious than all the others and seems to be the owner and heir of the kingdom of heaven; yet he is nothing else than Esau, that is, self-righteous, work-righteous, and a hypocrite who is not seriously concerned about religion. He is religious solely for the sake of gain and his belly. Nor can the name "church" be taken away from him, just as we do not have the name "church" before the world but are regarded as heretics and as born second. But the papists boast that they are the first– born. And even if we were to prevail over the pope and his followers and to achieve success with the doctrine which characterizes the true church, there would arise among us either papists or Turks who would arrogate to themselves the title "church," just as the Anabaptists and the Sacramentarians, etc., have already appeared. And it cannot happen otherwise. Thus the Arians arose when the heathen persecutors had been overcome. They usurped the name "church," and the true church was despised

- 198 and spurned. Thus at all times Cain or Abel, Esau or Jacob certainly originate from the same stock and from the same Gospel of salvation.

And so Esau is the bishop, the factotum, and the church. Yet nothing is owed to him; for by divine authority the entire blessing has been transferred to Jacob, who is the true possessor of all honors and of the kingdom of heaven. But so far he has been deprived of the name and prestige owed to him until his brother Esau himself provides a wonderful opportunity to acquire it—an opportunity that surpasses

Jacob's every hope and thought. One cannot get away from the pottage.78 The intention to deceive his brother does not enter Jacob's mind; but everything happens in accordance with the arrangement and plan of God, contrary to the intention of each of the two, Jacob and Esau.

Jacob is attending to his usual tasks; he is in the tent with his mother Rebecca, and there he is cooking pottage. This simple matter God turns into a wonderful opportunity. Esau returns from the field. The exertion and activity of hunting—a pursuit which pleased his father Isaac—have made him tired, and it is apparent that he did not bring along anything to eat, because he is not only fatigued but also hungry and thirsty. This is why he asks so eagerly for some of that red pottage, for he employs a repetition: "Let me eat some of the red pottage, that red pottage." This indicates a great appetite and desire for food. It is as if some famished person were to say: "Let me eat with you of the carp, and of just that carp for which I have a desire." Moses wanted to indicate not only the hunger and weariness of Esau but also his pleasure and appetite, namely, that he looked at and longed for that red pottage with extraordinary pleasure.

I commend this passage to the Hebrew grammarians for more careful explanation, for it is impossible to translate any language in such a way that all the emphases and forms of all words and sentences are preserved. The verb Esau uses in speaking to Jacob is .ינִִטי ֵֵעִלְהַ It occurs in this passage only, but what its meaning is neither the Jews nor I know.79 The conjugation and the construction reveal the meaning to some extent: "I beg you; let me eat; feed me; give me to eat." It is not without a reason that Holy Scripture wanted to speak in this particular way; it could have used another expression to denote feeding, nourishing, or something of that kind. But it wanted to use a special verb. Rabbi Solomon imagines that Esau was so tired that he was unable to raise his hands to his mouth and put the food into himself. But I do not know whether this agrees properly with what follows, when the text says: "He ate and drank and went his way" (v. 34). But the meaning is that Esau wanted the pottage, which Jacob had cooked for himself, to be given to him. He said: "Feed or refresh me with that red pottage."

That the words "Therefore his name was called Edom" are added is not at all without a purpose, although the reason for the name, namely, the lentils or the red pottage, seems rather ridiculous and senseless. Undoubtedly, however, something more important is hinted at. For above (v. 25), when

Esau was born completely red, he was not called Edom because of his red skin, which would be a weightier and more justifiable reason for this surname; but there his name is called Esau. Now, when he had his fill of the red pottage, he is called Edom.

But Esau has three names. Esau is his own name, which he received at birth or at his circumcision.

His surname is Edom, from the red pottage. His third name is Seir. Above these two names, Edom and Seir, are combined; and yet he is called Esau. Furthermore, he got the name Seir either from the mountain on which he lived—previously it was called Seir—or from his shagginess, because he was red and hairy; perhaps even the region he occupied was rough and wild. Hence the Idumaean nation is called the nation of Seir, from Esau, who occupied Mt. Seir, or because in that land the יםריִעִשְׂ lived, that is, fauns and shaggy satyrs, whom we call wild, hairy men.80 But I am not sure whether or not such fauns and satyrs lived in this region. Elsewhere in the Bible the יםריִעִשְׂ are taken to be demons who appear in the form of fauns.81

31. Jacob said: First sell me your birthright.

32. Esau said: I am about to die; of what use is a birthright to me?

33. Jacob said: Swear to me first. So he swore to him, and sold his birthright to Jacob.

34. Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentils, and he ate and drank, and rose and went his way. Thus Esau despised his birthright.

- 199 At this point an important question about the purchase and sale of the birthright arises; for the birthright is something sacred, and one may neither purchase nor sell it. Consequently, one asks whether both did wrong: the one by selling his birthright, the other by buying it. Lyra maintains that Esau sinned by selling it; but he says that Jacob did not sin by purchasing it, because he was the firstborn by divine decree in accordance with the statement: "The elder will serve the younger."82 Esau was in possession of the primogeniture that did not belong to him. Although he appropriated it to himself on account of his birth, nevertheless he did not have it by God's will. But, as people are wont to say, possession is nine points of the law. For this reason Jacob was unable to confuse him. Esau had the support of human right, divine right, and birth; and among all nations all this gives the property and the lordship to the twin born first. Besides, the law grants him a double share in the father's possessions. Therefore if God had not changed and revoked that right, Esau's primogeniture would have remained unimpaired. But because Jacob knows by the voice of God that it belongs to him, he does not sin by buying his own right for himself. He did well by watching for all opportunities to obtain the primogeniture that belonged to him.

But this could not be done by any more convenient method than a sale. Even though that pottage or morsel is not a fair price for the birthright, nevertheless it serves to ward off a lawsuit or to obviate trouble, as the jurists say. For it often happens that someone is unjustly harassed by sycophants who resort to legal proceedings against him, and, either by producing false witnesses or by devising other tricks, try to deprive him of his possessions, as though they had been wrongfully acquired by him.

Although they could protect their right, people who love peace nevertheless give money to the sycophants in order to avoid their chicanery rather than see the lawsuits through. In this case, the common saying holds good: "One must light two candles to the devil." Thus Jacob gave Esau the red morsel and freed himself of any trouble from his brother, who kept boasting of the primogeniture. As a result, Jacob could keep his property and right in peace. This is approximately what Lyra, in a manner pious and godly enough for that time, says concerning this passage.

Above, in connection with the history of Abraham, who bought a field for a burial (Gen. 23), I spoke about simony, namely, whether on this account Abraham must be called a simonist, since a burial is one of the things that are sacred and the purchase or sale of sacred things is called simony.83

But we heard that the field which was purchased was a worldly thing subject to a carnal-minded master. And the sale of a field is a completely civil transaction. Therefore Abraham did not sin when he bought the field and established a burial place there. Otherwise whatever a Christian purchases for his daily needs—bread, meat, wine, all of which are devoted to the need of the saints—would be an act of simony. This is absurd.

Furthermore, the laws and canons call it simony when spiritual things are sold for money. They call the sale of a cemetery simony, because a cemetery is sacred to Christians. They also call it simony to sell part of a parish or lands from benefices, which they call ecclesiastical things. This was that monstrous sin against which the theologians and canonists used to inveigh unanimously before these times. They condemned the bishops and the Roman courtiers who bought or sold bishoprics. But they accomplished nothing with their outcries, and now they are laughed at by the entire papacy, which is actually full of simony. And if you take simony out of the papacy, you have already taken the sun away from it. For the courtiers have no other business than to buy and sell sacerdotal offices.

Hence to rid the Roman Church of simony is to destroy it from the very bottom. Where will the splendor and pomp of the cardinals of the Roman Curia be if you do away with simony? Indeed, the entire Curia itself will perish from the very bottom. For the number of the cardinals who have already swallowed up all the church properties is too great. The cardinals plundered and devoured the monastery of Agnes in Rome—the monastery which supported 160 persons.84 Thus as simony is defined in canon law everything is full of simony, and he who wants to take simony away from the papacy will be acting as if he wanted to put the devil in heaven. John Hus and others who taught at that time censured this vice severely. But they did so in vain. For the Roman Curia is a damnable institution which all people should beware of and abhor. What instructions, therefore, would it give concerning faith and good morals? The papacy is a congregation of demons and of the worst people.

They themselves condemn simony, and yet they live and are supported by it. For this reason it is fitting that we are warned in Rev. 18:4: "Come out of her, my people, lest you take part in her sins, lest

- 200 you share in her plagues." All its assemblages are of the devil. Therefore let us shun them, lest we become sharers in their plague.

But we could excuse these thefts of theirs by means of some gloss to the effect that one should not call them simony, because they are nonecclesiastical depredations, and there is no difference between such simony and nonecclesiastical seizure. It is no different from what we see today, namely, that the nobles fight among themselves about the seizure of lands, estates, and villages. The benefices and salaries which we enjoy are also acquired in a simoniacal manner.85 "From the hire of the harlot they have been gathered," as is stated in Micah 1:7. But if they plunder the possessions of the church, they devote them to luxury and pomp, not to the use of godly priests. We, on the other hand, devote them to their proper use, namely, to the support of ministers of the church and to the maintenance of schools.

Therefore we are not at all concerned about this simony. But because they burden themselves with their canon law, we say to them: "I will condemn you out of your own mouth" (Luke 19:22).

True simony, however, is the sale and purchase of a spiritual thing for money, as, for example, if someone wanted to buy grace, faith, love, miracles, and the virtues of the Holy Spirit with which the church of God is adorned. Simon tried to do this (Acts 8:19). It is not that the thing itself can be handed over by buying or selling holy things. For the Holy Spirit does not bestow His gifts for money; nor does God accept gold and silver for the forgiveness of sins, for life, eyes, senses, and all blessings.

No, God's munificence dispenses His gifts to the grateful and the ungrateful. The only thing it demands is thanksgiving, so that we say: "Blessed be the Lord God in His gifts," so that divinity is attributed to Him, that is, that we acknowledge Him as God, of whom we confess wholeheartedly, by mouth and by deed, that He is the Creator. For no other price can be paid for such great gifts.

But one should look at the intention and the desire that prompt the purchase or sale of sacred things. Simon's intention, for example, is86 simoniacal, since it is his wish to be able to receive the Holy Spirit for cash. Such is also the meaning of these words when we pray that God may be glorified and that His kingdom may be preserved. God cannot be debased or disgraced, because He is in essence the very glory, power, and goodness. But our intention and desire is such that we wish that God did not exist and that His glory were profaned; and we manifest this toward the Word and the sacraments.

If we were able to harm or debase God as we do His Word and sacraments, then indeed we would not refrain from doing even this. Hence true simony is the traffic which is carried on with the Word of God, the sacraments, the church, and the saints. This simony the pope has not understood; nor does he understand it today, although the entire papacy is engulfed in it, and has been long before it became simoniacal according to the laws; for they used to sell heaven, the forgiveness of sins, grace, and the Holy Spirit for works. This accounts for such a great number of churches, cloisters, Masses, indulgences, and holy orders. With these works we wanted to earn God's grace.

In this manner they made a peddler of God, who would not bestow the kingdom of heaven without pay but would do so for a price and for merits. Even though He offers it gratis, they nevertheless scorn the freely bestowed favor and contribute 100 or 1,000 guldens for building cloisters, churches, and the like, with which to buy grace and God's benefits. Is this not trafficking in grace and forgiveness of sins? And this is the kind of person the pope was when he was best, and with this kind of simony he filled the entire world, to the extent that the world is nothing else than a cesspool of true simony. For what else are the societies doing than to receive money and to regard profit as godliness?

Strictly speaking, however, it is impossible to buy grace; and if you were to attempt this, it would be like wanting to milk a he–goat.87 The pope milks the he-goat; the people hold the sieve underneath, as the proverb says. Consequently, even if it were possible for the pope to be reformed and for crass simony to be purged away, they nevertheless cannot be purged of true simony, because this is the soul of the pope. Just as the soul is the essence of the body, so the pope is a simonist in body and soul. But when an end has been put to simony, whatever there is in the way of papal pomp, splendor, and prestige will be done away with, and only the Bishop of Rome will remain.

Thus one can see what great dangers and evils there are in the papacy, how great an abyss it is, and how horribly the entire world has been swallowed up through the primacy of the pope. Therefore we should hate that beast with a perfect hate. Nevertheless, they are still fighting to keep his primacy safe and intact. But what else would this be than to restore simony to life? It is surely horrible blasphemy and a misuse of the name of God, and it will be punished with eternal condemnation. To such a point

- 201 they have dragged the Word, the name of God, and the church. Yet nothing has been bought. They only imagine that God's nature is such that He wants to sell grace. The intention and desire are simoniacal. In reality, however, there is a sieve and a he-goat.

Yet by nature this evil is implanted in the hearts of all human beings. If God were willing to sell grace, we would accept it more quickly and more gladly than when He offers it gratis. Formerly, when simony prevailed, all people were exceedingly eager to build countless monasteries and churches, because it was a sale and purchase of the kingdom of heaven. Now, when it is offered gratis and the statement is made: "God has sent His Son into the flesh to bestow eternal life on all who believe. You have earned nothing, but deliverance from death and sins, the Holy Spirit, and the kingdom of heaven are given gratis"—now the world disdains this mercy and munificence of God. Formerly, when we were taught how we could earn grace by our works, all eagerly devoted all their efforts and means to this, just as this little town of Wittenberg gave 1,000 guldens to the monks every year.88

Everywhere there is praise of Ambrose's decidedly harmful statement that the kingdom of heaven belongs to the poor, which is based on what Christ says in Luke 16:9: "That they may receive you into the eternal habitations."89 This statement, like a sharp knife, pierced the hearts of all. "If the rich want to be saved, they should buy from the poor," they would shout. "But the Franciscans and the other religious brothers are the poor; they have the kingdom of heaven, and from them you must buy."

What a monstrous, ominous, and amazing state of affairs it is that the world spurns deliverance from sin, death, and hell—deliverance offered gratis through Christ! If simony were to prevail again, all would generously pour out their wealth. But when we teach in accordance with the Word and commandment of Christ: "Receive gratis, and give gratis to preachers, ministers, and schoolmasters," it is like telling a story to the deaf.90 Indeed, they even rob those whom they should honor and help.

Are these not the horrible ragings of darkness? Thus every human being is a simonist, and yet no such sale can take place; for neither to any human being nor to the monks has God given anything else in return for their vows than the flames of hell and eternal tortures.

Moreover, one can see how pitiable and dangerous a matter it is to have fallen away from the proposition of primary importance—the proposition concerning justification by faith without works.

When it has been obscured and obliterated, the entire world becomes addicted to simony. Thus the Turks also strive to placate God with their works and to buy spiritual things for money and for merits.

Therefore it is simony in name, like that described in canon law. For they purchase and obtain nothing for a price and merits, but that intention and desire has taken root deep in the human heart. Because of this every human being is a simonist by nature and would want God to be so constituted that He would be appeased by human works and merits, and that one could point out to Him: "I have done much and have fasted much; these things Thou shouldst consider and shouldst sell me salvation and eternal life."

But God neither knows nor hears such workers of iniquity. He sets forth His will in the apostolic teaching (Eph. 2:8–9): "By grace you have been saved, and not because of works."When that grace has been done away with, there is no longer any difference between the Turk and the pope, the heathen and the Jews; they are all simonists and milkers of he-goats.

The simony of the canonists is less serious and is only physical; it should be referred to as robbery in civil life. But when the pope receives crowns, cities, and regions from kings and monarchs in order that he may make mention of them in the Mass, when he puts forth a semblance of godliness and wants to appear most pious, then he is worst and a simonist through and through. For in the former instance he does harm only by his example and confesses to the simony of which he is guilty by resorting to robbery in civil life; in the latter instance he does not confess his sin but extols and praises his righteousness and religion. I have wanted to call attention to these things in order that it may be understood what true simony is, and in order that we may continue in the pure doctrine, which teaches how God has given us His Son and through Him all heavenly and spiritual blessings, which the world wants to purchase for a price and does not want to accept gratis.

Let us now return to the account. It appears that Jacob insisted on the purchase. Therefore he cannot be excused and freed from the offense of simony; for he states plainly: "Sell me your birthright." By what right, then, does he make this demand and commit so great a sin that he tries to purchase the blessing, which is spiritual and pertains to Ghrist and to future events, all of which are sacred and concern the future life? In this life all things are unholy and polluted. But the sacraments

- 202 and the sacred acts were not instituted for the sake of the present life but in order that they might be a sacred preparation for future things. For by the Gospel I am prepared, reborn, and renewed for the future life. It has not been delivered to me in order that I may become rich from it. But he who is a pastor and preaches it in order to acquire riches and the glory of this world is a simonist. Thus the benefit of Baptism is that I am transferred from the bosom of my mother and out of the grave and am put back into Paradise, out of death into life. Accordingly, I am not seeking there the joys and pleasures of the world; but I make use of the spiritual gifts in such a manner that when those that are physical come to an end, I am brought out of this life to eternal life and to immortality. Therefore he who serves as a pastor and absolves or administers the sacraments in order to obtain glory and power by doing so is a simonist according to that crude definition of the canonists. He is not one of those who are more subtle and want to earn eternal life with their works.

But why does Jacob demand that the birthright be sold to him? And since he wants to buy the birthright, it follows that this is a business transaction. I answer: Jacob saw the opportunity by which he could get possession of the birthright, and he wanted to take advantage of it.

Furthermore, his brother Esau is one of those who are simonists in a crude way; that is, in the spiritual blessing he sought nothing beyond the belly, since he did not visit the tent but despised the worship of God. First he was indifferent to little things. Then he came to despise the greater blessings, just as the first-born Cain did. Esau did not understand the greatness of the blessing. Therefore he sold it for the goods and pleasures of the present world, so that before God he was deprived in reality of his primogeniture and all his possessions. Therefore Jacob was waiting for the opportunity at hand and agreed with his brother on a definite price, lest in the future any troubles or any inconvenience be caused for him by his brother on account of the primogeniture.

Thus today the pope has the name "church." We do not have it. We know, however, that we really are the church because we have the Word, the sacraments, and the Keys, which Christ left behind, not in order that they may be of use to our power and to the lusts of this life, but that they may prepare us for the coming of the Son of God. Therefore we are the true church.

The pope, on the other hand, arrogates this name and title to himself; for he is in possession, and he boasts that he is the successor of Peter and Paul. Now if I wanted to make the following agreement with the pope: "I shall give you so many thousand guldens every year, in order that91 you may let me preach the Gospel freely and in its purity"—would that be simony? No; for I am not buying what I have before this, namely, the proper use of the sacraments, the pure doctrine of the Gospel, of faith, and of hope by looking forward to the future life. All these things have already been granted to me even against the will of the pope and without his authority. In fact, by offering him 1,000 guldens I am merely seeking to rid myself of that annoyance by making payments. Consequently, I am not buying anything but am merely offering my opponent a morsel and red lentils in order to be able to deprive the pope of the word "church." I am not concerned about those bulls and indulgences of his. I would be willing to give the princes of our side the advice to pay him several thousand kronen every year, to the end that bloodshed and other offenses may cease and the Gospel may be spread in peace. This is not simony; it is ridding oneself of an annoyance by making payments.

For this reason it is not an actual sale when Jacob says to Esau: "Sell me your birthright"; for the birthright has already been in Jacob's possession, and Esau has been deprived of it. Possession is with Jacob, but without the name; the name is with Esau, but without possession. Because Jacob now sees that Esau understands or seeks nothing in the blessing except the belly—just as the pope, under the pretext of the church, seeks only his own glory and power—he offers Cerberus a morsel to prevent him from being troublesome to him in the future.92

Thus I would surely wish that our princes would pay the emperor 20,000 guldens every year, so that the Gospel could be taught in peace and quiet. "But," someone will say, "will you in this way be paying money for sacred things?" Not at all; for we are not buying what we already have, and they cannot take it from us. But we are paying this money in order that they may let us alone and the pope and the emperor may grant us peace.

Besides, O pope and cardinals, those spiritual blessings are not yours; they are ours. Although the pope would never grant us both kinds in the sacrament, we nevertheless have them from God. Nor can they sell them; or, if they should want to do so, they will be milking the he-goat and holding a sieve

- 203 underneath. We have both kinds. The pope objects to it; God allows it. But if they do not cease annoying us with their persecutions, killings, and robberies, we shall make an agreement with them to the effect that they devour the red pottage. But they must not get the glory of having given or presented anything to us, for this would be acquiescing in their authority. This is something divine and sacred which I cannot buy for money. Therefore we do not want it to be given or presented by the pope.

Thus Esau, like Ishmael (Gen. 21:9), undoubtedly annoyed his brother Jacob greatly and proudly gave him orders, because he [Esau] was the lord and the first-born; but Jacob was regarded as a servant and a fool. From this persecution and vexation on the part of his brother Jacob wanted to free himself, so that he could safely get possession of the spiritual blessing. Thus today many Christians leave cities on account of their confession of the Gospel, lest they be compelled to endure the tyranny of the papists.93 And Paul says in Rom. 12:18: "If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all." If the adversaries are unwilling to be peaceful, give them the red pottage, in order that they may give you peace, that is, let you enjoy in peace the blessings which you have before this.

Esau's answer to his brother's request follows: "Behold I am dying; and of what use is the birthright to me?" The scoundrel despairs94 and by his own testimony betrays his irreligious heart.

Should one act and feel this way about religion, godliness, and one's birthright? Now he confesses plainly that he does not understand his birthright and does not regard it as the inheritance of future life and as a sacred matter. But if the birthright is of no benefit except for the glory and riches of this life, what will become of faith, hope, and the expectation of eternal blessings? Hence we shall say with the ungodly and the Epicureans what they are wont to say when they hear heaven mentioned. Their response is: "What is heaven if we have flour here?"95 The pope has a similar sentiment about the church and the Keys. "What are you saying about the Keys? I have to use them to accumulate riches and to hold kings in check." These are the Esauitic words of the ungodly, who regard gain as godliness and would long since have bidden Christ and His Gospel farewell if they would not be blessed temporally in this world.

Consequently, this is important evidence of Holy Scripture that Esau has already lost his birthright; for he is judged out of his own mouth. Yet he undoubtedly thought: "I am the lord; I shall indeed sell my birthright, but I shall only fool him. Even if I do sell it, still I can get it back." In this way he deluded and despised his brother, just as the pope and his masks have deluded the whole world by selling good works and indulgences. They thought that they would go unpunished or that eventually they could repent.

And today many misuse the doctrine of the Gospel and meanwhile flatter themselves by saying:

"Even if I persist in sins and am a godless person, still I shall eventually recover and return to the way." Thus some say even about Duke George: "He could have been converted in the last moment of his life."96 But all these people will finally hear that sad verdict which appears in the Epistle to the Hebrews (12:17) concerning Esau: "For you know that afterward, when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected; for he found no chance to repent though he sought it with tears."

Thus the antinomians enjoy the advantages of the world in order to be happy in this life. They say that they want to be converted in good time. They despise their blessing, the church, Baptism, the Keys, forgiveness of sins, and eternal life. They receive the grace of God in vain and disregard "the acceptable time" and "the day of salvation" (2Cor. 6:2). But at some future time they will seek the neglected opportunity in vain and too late, as the bride in the Song of Solomon (5:6) laments: "I opened to my beloved, but my beloved had turned and gone."

Thus when Esau says: "I am about to die; of what use is the birthright to me?" he indicates that he is thinking only of his belly and that he is scorning the promise as worthless and unprofitable for the future life, precisely as the Epicureans say today: "Why is it necessary to hear the Gospel and to make use of the Keys or the Lord's Supper?" But Jacob thinks differently and knows that these sacred things are preparations for the life to come. Therefore he esteems them highly and burns with desire for them.

But those who want to make use of them for this life only are deprived of them justly and by divine authority, for in that case they have the freedom of the will knowingly and willingly to sell or reject them.

- 204 After Jacob sees that the favorable opportunity is restricted to a moment and brief space of time, he follows up his request and wants the agreement made binding. He says: "Swear to me at this time," or in this hour, because the opportunity should not be missed. Then Esau swears, and thus he sells his birthright. This is the way we should deal with the papists too. If they gave an oath, hostages, and seals that they will not begin a war against us, we would at once set a red pottage before them.

But a question raised by others at this point remains.97 We shall deal with it too, lest it prove troublesome to the reader. Was that red food the price of the sale and purchase? They reply that it was not, because the birthright was a very important and very precious thing. Therefore they say that it is not likely that Esau accepted this insignificant food as the price. Consequently, they claim that this food was merely the pledge which confirmed the agreement which Esau accepted as a sign of having sold his birthright. Thus it is customary among us for one or two tankards of wine to be placed between the purchaser and seller as a sign of a sale. The Germans call it gleichkauff.

This opinion has come from the commentaries of the rabbis. We reject it. Thus all their opinions must be dealt with in such a manner that what is good in them is retained, but bad and false ideas are avoided. For this opinion conflicts with the clear text in the Epistle to the Hebrews (12:16), where it is plainly stated: "Esau sold his birthright for a single meal."

Holy Scripture wanted to portray the nature and ways of the wicked and hypocritical church, which must be recognized and understood from its ways, of which Esau is a type and figure. For it is in the habit of glorying very much in the name of God and wants to be and to be regarded as the church. And before the world it is the church. Similarly, Esau has the primogeniture; but he despises it.

His contempt causes him to lose it; for he, in turn, is despised, rejected, and despoiled. Therefore his glorying is nothing, just as that of the papists, who boast that they are the church and the successors of the apostles, is nothing. He who wants to be the church must esteem his birthright highly, not only in this life but also after this life.

This conflict goes on and on in the world. Just as Esau struggled with Jacob, so we struggle against the papists, and before our time the Jewish people struggled against the apostles. The Jews maintained vehemently that they were the people of God, and Paul confesses that they are the church (cf. Rom.

2:17; 9:24). But because they retained only the name but despised the true church itself, they were rejected, and the Gentiles were called. Hos. 2:23: "And I will say to Not My people: 'You are My people'; and he shall say: 'Thou art my God.' " And in Deut. 32:21 we read: "I will stir them to jealousy with those who are no people; I will provoke them with a foolish nation."

Consequently, this is one mark, yes the worst color of the hypocritical church, that it is exceedingly proud and impudent in making use of the name of God, the church, the Keys, the ministry, and the sacraments, and can do nothing more than boast of God. Another mark is the fact that it actually despises and disregards the things that belong to the true church. It does not concern itself much about its birthright, just as the pope and the bishops do not teach, do not baptize, and do not perform any other duty in the church. They have only the name. But they show no fruit and result.

Therefore Christ says (Matt. 7:16): "You will know them by their fruits." But because the pope despises the church, he loses the church, and that empty boast of his is of no importance: "We are the Christians, we are the church, and we are the bishops." H the real substance is not there, you will not keep the name for long. Indeed, you have already been rejected. What you have you do not have. Thus the heretics who will come after us will lose the church; for it is a pillar of truth (1 Tim. 3:15), which they will thrust aside; and the boast and name without the truth is of no benefit to them.

Therefore when they shout: "We are the church, we have the authority to give commands," and want to compel us to give assent to their ordinances, we shall answer: "The church is of two kinds: in number and worth, in outward appearance and truth, and in name and reality," as they themselves teach.98 Without the reality Esau is the church only in name and outward appearance. So are all idolaters and heretics who arrogate to themselves the title "church." I can put up with it when someone is a Christian in number only and meanwhile still performs the outward duty. Even if he is secretly godless and vicious, there is nothing to prevent one from calling him a Christian or the church in number, but not worth—provided that he baptizes, takes care of the sick, and strengthens troubled consciences. This the pope and the bishops do not do. Therefore they should not even be compared to - 205 those who are secretly godless, for they do things that are contrary to their office in the church. They speak irreverently of the Word and persecute the godly, that is, the true church.

In our church there are many ministers in number only, but without worth. But the pope is an avowed adversary of the church; he suppresses the doctrine of faith, fills the world with idolatry, simony, and countless monstrosities. That is acting like a madman against the church in regard to number and worth, after the fashion of the Turks. Therefore the argument of the papists has no force at all. "We are the church in regard to number," they say. "Therefore you must put up with us." If they wanted to be such, they would have to agree with us in doctrine, teach, and govern. This is fitting99 for true and godly bishops. But they are descendants of Esau, adversaries and destroyers of the church, as the heretics are.

Those however, who, like many who are mingled with the company of the godly, feign godliness and are hypocrites we tolerate among the number of the believers, provided that they do not teach anything contrary to the profession of the true doctrine.

Moses has also depicted the third mark of the hypocritical church in this type. After Esau very smugly and with great impudence slighted the spiritual blessings—faith, love, patience, and kindness, which are in the church—yes, even despised all these, there now follows the appetite and intense desire for that red pottage; that is, because he is not concerned about the knowledge of Christ or about the increase of spiritual gifts or about life eternal, he becomes greedily desirous of the pleasures, the glory, and the honors of this life.

This is undoubtedly because Esau prefers the pottage to his birthright; that is, he is the church in regard to number, but he follows his flesh and blood and seeks gain in godliness. Thus the false church feigns godliness merely in order to enjoy the pleasures and honors of this world. But the true church seeks eternal life through patience and faith. The others are beasts of the belly, and their god is the belly (cf. Phil. 3:19).

This is the mystery of the red pottage which Holy Scripture sets before us in this passage, where the conflict between the two brothers about the birthright is settled. But lentils are not red; they are yellow. Therefore I think that they were prepared with saffron or another condiment in order to stimulate the appetite. But such is the nature of the present good things of this world by which men are delighted in an astonishing manner, so that they prefer indulgence in reveling and gourmandizing to eating and drinking the flesh and blood of the Son of God, that is, to believing and seeking heavenly blessings. They look only for gain and the glory of the world, the pleasantness and delight of which is so great that it excites in people not only hunger but some concupiscence. Therefore Esau employs the repetition: "Let me eat, I beg you, of the red pottage, of that red pottage."

Hence Holy Scripture is pointing out that all people become greedier, prouder, and more carnal when they have lost the blessing than they were before. For they all have flesh and blood and for this reason seek nothing except carnal things and long for the red pottage with horrible cupidity, but under the name of Christ and of God and under the title "church." Jacob, too, eats of the red pottage, but not so greedily. He does not repeat the word "red" twice, as Esau does. This means that the godly make use of the present things, not for their happiness but for their need.

Finally Moses adds that Esau attached little importance to the fact that he had sold his birthright.

There, too, his exceedingly impudent pride is indicated, for he thought that with human help he could safely and easily uphold his right against his brother without any consideration to their agreement.

Hypocrites and false brothers are in the habit of doing the same thing; they carry water on both shoulders.100 They are wily. Now they pretend that they are yielding and making some concessions; now they seize again what by no right belongs to them. Nevertheless, they have their explanations with which they cover up and excuse their hypocrisy in order that they may keep the red pottage together with the birthright; for they want to serve God and the belly or mammon at the same time.

Thus Esau thought: "Even though I have sold my birthright, have sworn, and have consumed the morsel, and my most contemptible brother now seems to have taken away my birthright, I shall nevertheless retain it and not keep faith." For he did not sell it in earnest; but he wanted to fool his brother and deceive him, as though he had sold it. Nevertheless, he wanted to keep his right. But the Epistle to the Hebrews (12:17) bears witness that later on he was rejected, and although he tried to recover his birthright—because he repented of having sold it—yet that repentance did not accomplish

- 206 anything at all, not that he was not saved, but that he was unable by means of any tears to obtain the blessing he had once lost. Consequently, it is my opinion that the morsel was the price of this sale; and I do not accept the gloss of the rabbis, because they are carnal people who understand nothing in the 2Luther, M. (1999, c1964). Vol. 4: Luther's works, vol. 4 : Lectures on Genesis: Chapters 21-25 (J. J.

Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther's Works (Gn,25.1). Saint Louis: Concordia