Lectio 3
Lecture 3
Factores legis
The doers of the law
2:13 Non enim auditores legis justi sunt apud Deum, sed factores legis justificabuntur. [n. 211]
2:13 For the hearers of the law are not just before God: but the doers of the law will be justified. [n. 211]
2:14 Cum autem gentes, quae legem non habent, naturaliter ea, quae legis sunt, faciunt, ejusmodi legem non habentes, ipsi sibi sunt lex: [n. 213]
2:14 For when the gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature those things that are of the law; they, having not the law, are a law to themselves, [n. 213]
2:15 qui ostendunt opus legis scriptum in cordibus suis, [n. 218] testimonium reddente illis conscientia ipsorum, et
inter se invicem cogitationibus accusantibus, aut etiam defendentibus, [n. 219]
2:15 Who show the work of the law written in their hearts, [n. 218] their conscience bearing witness to them: and their thoughts between themselves accusing or also defending one another, [n. 219]
2:16 in die, cum judicabit Deus occulta hominum, secundum Evangelium meum per Jesum Christum. [n. 222]
2:16 In the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my Gospel. [n. 222]
210. Postquam Apostolus confutavit humanum iudicium, quo se gentiles et Iudaei mutuo iudicabant et divinum iudicium commendavit, hic procedit ad ostendendum ea, quibus Iudaei gloriabantur, eis non sufficere ad salutem et
210. After confuting the human judgment with which the gentiles and Jews judged one another and commending God’s judgment, the Apostle now undertakes to show that the things in which the Jews gloried do not suffice for their salvation.
primo ostendit propositum,
First, he states his position;
secundo solvit ea quae in contrarium dici possent III cap., ibi quid ergo amplius, etc.
second, he answers arguments against his position, at what advantage then has the Jew? (Rom 3:1).
De duobus Iudaei gloriabantur, scilicet de lege et circumcisione, quae non erat ex lege Moysi, sed ex patribus, ut dicitur Io. VII, 22.
The Jews gloried in two things, namely, the law and circumcision, which stemmed not from the law but from the patriarchs (John 7:22).
Primo ergo ostendit quod lex audita sive recepta, non sufficiebat ad salutem.
First, therefore, he shows that the Jewish law heard or accepted was not enough for salvation;
Secundo ostendit idem de circumcisione, ibi circumcisio quidem, etc.
second, he shows the same about circumcision, at circumcision indeed (Rom 2:25).
Circa primum duo facit.
In regard to the first he does two things:
Primo proponit quod intendit,
first, he sets forth his position;
secundo manifestat propositum, ibi cum enim gentes.
second, he clarifies it, at for when the gentiles.
211. Circa primum proponit duo, unum excludendo, alterum asserendo.
211. In regard to the first he sets forth two things: one by rejecting; the other by asserting.
Excludit enim quod Iudaei opinabantur se per solum legis auditum iustificari. Unde dicit: Ita dictum est, peccantes in lege iudicentur per legem; non enim auditores legis, ex hoc ipso quod legem audiunt, iusti sunt apud Deum et si apud homines iusti reputantur. Matth. VII, 26: qui audit verba mea et non facit ea, similis est viro stulto. Iac. I, 23: si quis auditor est verbi, et non factor, etc.
For he rejects the Jewish opinion that they were made just by merely hearing the law. Hence he says: I have said that all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law, for the hearers of the law, i.e., in virtue of having heard the law, are not just before God, even if they are deemed just before men: every one who hears these words of mine and does not do them is like a foolish man (Matt 7:26); if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who observes his natural face in a mirror (Jas 1:23).
Secundo astruit quod factores legis sunt iusti, cum dicit sed factores legis iustificabuntur. Matth. VII, 24: omnes qui audit verba mea et facit ea, assimilabitur viro, et cetera. Iac. I, 22: estote factores verbi, et non auditores tantum et Ps. CX, 10: intellectus bonus omnibus facientibus eum.
Second, he declares that the doers of the law are righteous, when he says, but the doers of the law will be justified: everyone who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man (Matt 7:24); be doers of the word and not hearers only (Jas 1:22); a good understanding have all those who practice it (Ps 111:10).
212. Sed circa secundum videtur esse quod infra III, 20, dicitur: ex operibus legis non iustificabitur omnis caro coram eo. Non ergo aliqui ex hoc quod opera legis faciunt, iustificantur.
212. But this point seems to conflict with his own statement below that by the works of the law no flesh will be justified before him (Rom 3:20). Consequently, no one is justified precisely for doing the works of the law.
Sed dicendum est quod iustificari tripliciter accipi potest. Uno modo potest accipi quantum ad reputationem, ut tunc aliquis iustificari dicatur, quando iustus reputatur. Ez. XVI, 51: iustificasti sorores tuas, scilicet per reputationem. Et secundum hoc potest intelligi factores legis iustificabuntur, id est, iusti apud Deum et homines reputabuntur.
The answer is that justification can be taken in three ways: in one way, in regard to reputation; then one is said to be justified, when he is regarded as just: you have made your sisters appear justified, i.e., by reputation (Ezek 16:51). In this sense, the doers of the law will be justified, i.e., are considered just before God and men.
Secundo, per executionem iustitiae, inquantum scilicet opera iustitiae exequuntur. Lc. XVIII, 14: descendit hic iustificatus in domum suam, quia scilicet publicamus opus iustitiae fecerat confitendo peccatum. Et hoc modo verificatur quod hic dicitur factores legis iustificabuntur, scilicet legis iustitiam exequendo.
Second, by doing what is just: this man went down to his home justified (Luke 18:14), because the publican performed a work of justice by confessing his sin. In this way is verified the statement that the doers of the law will be justified, i.e., by performing the justice of the law.
Tertio modo potest accipi iustificatio quantum ad causam iustitiae, ut scilicet ille dicatur iustificari qui iustitiam de novo accipit, sicut infra V, 1: iustificati igitur ex fide, etc. Sic autem non intelligitur hic quod factores legis iustificentur, quasi per opera legis iustitiam acquirant. Hoc quidem esse non potest neque quantum ad opera caeremonialia, quae gratiam iustificantem non conferebant; neque etiam quantum ad moralia, ex quibus habitus iustitiae non acquiritur, sed potius per habitum iustitiae infusum huiusmodi opera facimus.
In a third way justification can be considered in regard to the cause of justice, so that a person is said to be justified, when he newly receives justice: being justified therefore by faith, let us have peace with God (Rom 5:1). It must not be supposed, however, that the doers of the law are justified as though acquiring justice through the works of the law. This cannot be accomplished either by the ceremonial works, which confer no justifying grace, or by the moral works, from which the habit of justice is not acquired; rather, we do such works in virtue of an infused habit of justice.
213. Deinde cum dicit cum enim gentes, manifestat propositum.
213. Then when he says for when the gentiles, he clarifies his position.
Et primo ostendit quod factores legis, etiam si non sint auditores, iustificantur;
First, he shows that doers of the law are justified even without being hearers;
secundo, quod auditores legis sine legis observantia non iustificantur, ibi si autem Iudaeus.
second, that hearers of the law are not justified without observing the law, at but if you are called a Jew (Rom 2:17).
Circa primum tria facit.
In regard to the first he does three things:
Primo proponit dignitatem eorum qui legem absque auditu observant;
first, he mentions the worthiness of those who observe the law without having heard it;
secundo manifestat quod dixerat, ibi qui ostendunt opus legis;
second, he clarifies what he had said, at who show the work of the law;
tertio probat ibi testimonium reddente illis.
third, he proves it, at their conscience bearing witness.
214. Circa primum tria tangit quantum ad gentiles.
214. In regard to the first he touches on three things relating to the gentiles.
Primo, carentiam legis, dicens cum enim gentes quae legem non habent, scilicet divinam, quam non acceperunt. Non enim gentibus data est lex, sed Iudaeis, secundum illud Eccli. XXIV, 33: legem mandavit Moyses in praeceptis iustitiarum, et haereditatem domui Iacob et Israel promissiones. Et Ps. CXLVII, 20: non fecit taliter omni nationi. Deut. XXXIII, 4: legem praecepit nobis Moyses, haereditatem multitudinis Iacob.
First, their lack of the law, saying, for when the gentiles, who have not the law, namely, the divine law, which they have not received. For the law was not delivered to the gentiles but to the Jews: the law which Moses commanded us as an inheritance for the congregations of Jacob (Sir 24:24); he has not dealt thus with any other nation (Ps 147:20); when Moses commanded us a law, as a possession for the assembly of Jacob (Deut 33:4).
Ex quo patet quod gentiles non peccabant non observando caeremonialia legis.
From this it is clear that the gentiles did not sin by not observing the ceremonies of the law.
215. Secundo commendat in eis legis observantiam, cum dicit naturaliter faciunt quae sunt legis, id est, quae lex mandat, scilicet quantum ad praecepta moralia, quae sunt de dictamine rationis naturalis, sicut et de Iob dicitur, quod erat iustus et rectus ac timens Deum et recedens a malo. Unde ipse dicit: vestigia eius secutus est pes meus, vias eius custodivi.
215. Second, he commends their observance of law, when he says they do by nature those things that are of the law, i.e., the moral precepts, which flow from a dictate of natural reason. Thus Job was blameless and upright, fearing God and turning away from evil. Hence he himself says: my foot has held fast to his steps; I have kept his ways (Job 23:11).
216. Sed quod dicit naturaliter, dubitationem habet.
216. But the expression by nature causes some difficulty.
Videtur enim patrocinari Pelagianis, qui dicebant quod homo per sua naturalia poterat omnia praecepta legis servare.
For it seems to favor the Pelagians, who taught that man could observe all the precepts of the law by his own natural powers.
Unde exponendum est naturaliter, id est per naturam gratia reformatam. Loquitur enim de gentilibus ad fidem conversis, qui auxilio gratiae Christi coeperant moralia legis servare. Vel potest dici naturaliter, id est per legem naturalem ostendentem eis quid sit agendum, secundum illud Ps. IV, 7 s.: multi dicunt: quis ostendit nobis bona? Signatum, etc., quod est lumen rationis naturalis, in qua est imago Dei. Et tamen non excluditur quin necessaria sit gratia ad movendum affectum, sicut etiam per legem est cognitio peccati, ut dicitur infra III, 20, et tamen ulterius requiritur gratia ad movendum affectum.
Hence by nature should mean nature reformed by grace. For he is speaking of gentiles converted to the faith, who began to obey the moral precepts of the law by the help of Christ’s grace. Or by nature can mean by the natural law showing them what should be done, as in a psalm: there are many who say, ‘who shows us good things?’ The light of your countenance, O Lord, is signed upon us (Ps 4:6), i.e., the light of natural reason, in which is God’s image. All this does not rule out the need of grace to move the affections any more than the knowledge of sin through the law (Rom 3:20) exempts from the need of grace to move the affections.