Lecture 1 Lectio 1 Abraham not justified by circumcision Abraham non iustificatus circumcisione ^4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham has found, who is our father according to the flesh? [n. 322] ^4:1 Quid ergo dicemus invenisse Abraham patrem nostrum secundum carnem? [n. 322] ^4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he has glory, but not before God. [n. 323] ^4:2 Si enim Abraham ex operibus justificatus est, habet gloriam, sed non apud Deum. [n. 323] ^4:3 For what says the Scripture? Abraham believed God: and it was reputed to him unto justice. [n. 326] ^4:3 Quid enim dicit Scriptura? Credidit Abraham Deo, et reputatam est illi ad justitiam. [n. 326] ^4:4 Now to him who works, the reward is not reckoned according to grace but according to debt. [n. 328] ^4:4 Ei autem qui operatur, merces non imputatur secundum gratiam, sed secundum debitum. [n. 328] ^4:5 But to him who works not, yet believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reputed to justice, according to the purpose of the grace of God. ^4:5 Ei vero qui non operatur, credenti autem in eum, qui justificat impium, reputatur fides ejus ad justitiam secundum propositum gratiae Dei. ^4:6 As David also terms the blessedness of a man to whom God reputs justice without works: [n. 332] ^4:6 Sicut et David dicit beatitudinem hominis, cui Deus accepto fert justitiam sine operibus: [n. 332] ^4:7 Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven: and whose sins are covered. ^4:7 Beati, quorum remissae sunt iniquitates, et quorum tecta sunt peccata. ^4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord has not imputed sin. ^4:8 Beatus vir, cui non imputavit Dominus peccatum. ^4:9 This blessedness then, does it remain in the circumcision only or in the uncircumcision also? For we say that unto Abraham faith was reputed to justice. [n. 339] ^4:9 Beatitudo ergo haec in circumcisione tantum manet, an etiam in praeputio? Dicimus enim quia reputata est Abrahae fides ad justitiam. [n. 339] ^4:10 How then was it reputed? When he was in circumcision or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. ^4:10 Quomodo ergo reputata est? in circumcisione, an in praeputio? Non in circumcisione, sed in praeputio. 322. After excluding the glory which the Jews took in the law, on the basis of which they preferred themselves to the gentiles, the Apostle now excludes their glory in regard to circumcision. 322. Postquam Apostolus exclusit Iudaeorum gloriam quam habebant in lege, per eam se gentibus praeferentes, hic excludit eorum gloriam quantum ad circumcisionem. About this he does two things. Et circa hoc duo facit. First, he takes up the question he had raised earlier, when he asked, what is the profit of circumcision? (Rom 3:1). And because Abraham was the first to receive the command about circumcision, as stated in Genesis (Gen 17:10), he repeats the question in the person of Abraham himself, saying: if it is true that God justifies the uncircumcised as well as the circumcised, what profit shall we say then that Abraham has found, who is our father according to the flesh? That is, according to circumcision and other bodily observances. For it does not seem fitting to say that he found no usefulness, since it is stated in Isaiah, I am the Lord, your God, who teaches you useful things (Isa 48:17). Primo resumit quaestionem quam supra posuerat, dicens quae est utilitas circumcisionis? Et quia Abraham primus mandatum de circumcisione accepit, ut dicitur Gen. XVII, 10, ideo quaestionem iterat in persona ipsius Abrahae dicens: si ita est quod Deus iustificat praeputium, sicut et circumcisionem, quid ergo dicemus invenisse utilitatis Abraham patrem nostrum secundum carnem? Id est secundum circumcisionem carnalem et secundum alias observantias carnales? Videtur esse inconveniens si dicatur quod nihil utilitatis invenerit, cum dicatur Is. XLVII, 17: ego Dominus docens te utilia. 323. Second, when he says, for if Abraham, he answers the question he had raised. 323. Secundo, ibi si enim Abraham, etc., respondet propositae quaestioni. He does two things. Et duo facit. First, he shows that Abraham did not obtain justification through circumcision and the other works of the law, but rather through faith; Primo ostendit quod Abraham non hoc invenerit per circumcisionem, et caetera legis opera, quod per eam iustificaretur, sed magis per fidem. second, he commends his faith, at who against hope (Rom 4:18). Secundo commendat fidem ipsius, ibi qui contra spem, etc. In regard to the first he does two things. Circa primum duo facit. First, he explains his position with a reason based on divine acceptance; Primo ostendit propositum, ratione accepta ex parte divinae acceptationis; second, by reason of God’s promise, at for not through the law (Rom 4:13). secundo, ratione divinae promissionis, ibi non enim per legem, et cetera. In regard to the first he does three things. Circa primum tria facit. First, he proposes a conditional statement; Primo proponit quamdam conditionalem; second, he disproves the consequent, at for what says the Scripture? secundo probat destructionem consequentis, ibi quid enim dicit Scriptura, etc. Third, he proves the conditional statement, at as David also. Tertio, probat ipsam conditionalem, ibi sicut et David, etc. 324. In regard to the first the Apostle intends to argue in the following manner: if Abraham were justified from works of the law, he would have no glory with God; therefore, he was not justified from works. 324. Circa primum intendit Apostolus sic argumentari: si Abraham iustificatus esset ex operibus legis, non haberet gloriam apud Deum; ergo non ex operibus iustificatus est. Hence, he presents the conditional statement, saying: it has been asked what Abraham found in virtue of bodily circumcision, and it is obvious that he did not find himself justified from works of the law, such that his justice consisted in the works of the law; he has glory, namely, before men, who see the outward works, but not before God, who sees in secret: the Lord looks on the heart (1 Sam 16:7); so let no one boast of men (1 Cor 3:21). Hence it is written against some that they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God (John 12:43). Proponit ergo conditionalem dicens: quaesitum est quid Abraham invenit secundum carnalem circumcisionem, et manifestum est quod hoc non invenit ut iustificatus sit ex operibus legis, ita scilicet quod eius iustitia in operibus legis consistat; habet quidem gloriam, scilicet apud homines, qui exteriora facta vident, sed non apud Deum qui videt in occulto, secundum illud I Reg. XVI, 7: Deus autem intuetur cor. I Cor. III, 21: nemo vestrum glorietur in hominibus, etc. Unde contra quosdam dicitur Io. XII, 43: dilexerunt magis gloriam hominum quam Dei. 325. Against this one might object that becoming accustomed to outward works generates an inward habit, according to which a man’s heart is also well disposed and so made ready to perform well and take pleasure in good works, as the Philosopher teaches in Ethics II. 325. Sed contra hoc potest obiici, quia ex consuetudine operum exteriorum generatur interior habitus, secundum quem etiam cor hominis bene disponitur, ut sit promptum ad bene operandum et in bonis operibus delectetur, sicut Philosophus docet in II Ethicorum. The answer is that this takes place in human justice, through which man is ordained to the human good. For the habit of this justice can be acquired through human works, but the justice which obtains glory before God is ordained to the divine good, namely future glory, which exceeds human ability, as is said: it has not arisen in the heart of man what God has prepared for those who love him (1 Cor 2:9). Sed dicendum est quod hoc habet locum in iustitia humana, per quam scilicet homo ordinatur ad bonum humanum. Huius enim iustitiae habitus per opera humana potest acquiri, sed iustitia quae habet gloriam apud Deum, ordinatur ad bonum divinum, scilicet futurae gloriae, quae facultatem humanam excedit, secundum illud I Cor. II, 9: in cor hominis non ascendit quae praeparavit Deus diligentibus se. Consequently, a man’s works are not proportioned to causing the habit of this justice; rather, a man’s heart needs first to be justified inwardly by God, so that he can perform works proportioned to divine glory. Et ideo opera hominis non sunt proportionata ad huius iustitiae habitum causandum, sed oportet prius iustificari interius cor hominis a Deo, ut opera faciat proportionata divinae gloriae. 326. Then when he says, for what says, he disproves the consequent, which was negative, by proving the opposite affirmative, namely, that Abraham did have glory before God. 326. Deinde cum dicit quid enim, etc., destruit consequens quod fuit negativum, probando affirmationem oppositam, scilicet quod Abraham habebat gloriam apud Deum. He proves this on the authority of Scripture: Et hoc probat per auctoritatem Scripturae, first, he cites the authority; quam primo Apostolus ponit; second, he explains, at now to him. secundo exponit, ibi ei autem etc. 327. First, therefore, he says: I say that Abraham was justified in a way that gave him glory before God. For what says the Scripture? Abraham believed God who promised that his seed would be multiplied (Gen 15:6). Believe God and he will help you (Sir 2:6). And it was reputed to him, i.e., by God, unto justice: was not Abraham found faithful when tested? (1 Macc 2:52). Consequently, it is clear that before God, by whom that he believed was reckoned to him as justice, he has glory. 327. Dicit ergo primo: dico Abraham sic iustificatum esse quod habet gloriam apud Deum, quid enim Scriptura dicit? Gen. XV, 6: credidit Abraham Deo promittenti sibi seminis multiplicationem. Eccli. II, 6: crede Deo, et recuperabit te. Et reputatum est illi, scilicet a Deo, ad iustitiam. I Mach. II, 52: Abraham in tentatione inventus est fidelis. Et sic patet quod apud Deum, a quo est ei reputatum ad iustitiam quod credidit, gloriam habet.