Bondage of the Will

We are now arrived at the last part of this discussion, wherein I am, as I proposed, to bring forward my forces against free will. But I shall not produce them all, for who could do that within the limits of this small book, when the whole scripture, in every letter and iota, stands on my side? Nor is there any necessity for so doing, seeing that free will already lies vanquished and prostrate under a twofold overthrow. The one, where I have proved that all those things which it imagined made for itself, made directly against itself. The other, where I have made it manifest that those scriptures which it attempted to refute still remain invincible. If, therefore, it had not been vanquished by the former, it is enough if it be laid prostrate by the one weapon or the other. And now, what need is there that the enemy, already dispatched by the one weapon or the other, should have his dead body stabbed with a number of weapons more? In this part, therefore, I shall be as brief as the subject will allow. And from such numerous armies I shall produce only two champion generals, with a few of their legions, Paul and John the Evangelist. Section 135 Paul, writing to the Romans, thus enters upon his argument against free will and for the grace of God. The wrath of God, saith he, is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who hold the truth in unrighteousness. Romans 1.18 Dost thou hear this general sentence, against all men? That they are all under the wrath of God. And what is this but declaring that they all merit wrath and punishment? For he assigns the cause of the wrath against them. They do nothing but that which merits wrath, because they are all ungodly and unrighteous, and hold the truth in unrighteousness. Where is now the power of free will, which can endeavor anything good? Paul makes it to merit the wrath of God, and pronounces it ungodly and unrighteous. That therefore which merits wrath and is ungodly, only endeavors and avails against grace, not for grace. But someone will hear laugh at the yawning inconsiderateness of Luther, for not looking fully into the intention of Paul. Someone will say that Paul does not here speak of all men, nor of all their doings, but of those only who are ungodly and unrighteous, and who, as the words themselves describe them, hold the truth in unrighteousness. But that it does not hence follow that all men are the same. Here I observe that in this passage of Paul the words, against all ungodliness of men, are of the same import as if you should say, against the ungodliness of all men. For Paul, in almost all these instances, uses a Hebraism, so that the sense is, all men are ungodly and unrighteous, and hold the truth in unrighteousness. And therefore all merit wrath. Hence, in the Greek there is no relative, which might be rendered, of those who, but an article, causing the sense to run thus. The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men holding the truth in unrighteousness. So that this may be taken as an epithet, as it were, applicable to all men, as holding the truth in unrighteousness. Even as it is an epithet where it is said, our Father which art in heaven. Which might, in other words, be expressed thus, our heavenly Father, or our Father in heaven. For it is so expressed to distinguish those who believe and fear God. But these things might appear frivolous and vain. Did not the very train of Paul's argument require them to be so understood, and prove them to be true? For he had said just before, The gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth. To the Jew first, and also to the Greek. Romans 1.16 These words are surely neither obscure or ambiguous. To the Jew first, and also to the Greek. That is, the gospel of the power of God is necessary unto all men, that believing in it they might be saved from the wrath of God revealed. Does he not then, I pray you, who declares that the Jews who excelled in righteousness in the law of God and in the power of free will are without difference, destitute and in need of the power of God, by which they might be saved, and who makes that power necessary unto them, consider that they are all under wrath? What men then will you pretend to say are not under the wrath of God, when you are thus compelled to believe that the most excellent men in the world, the Jews and Greeks, were so? And further, whom among the Jews and Greeks themselves will you accept, when Paul subjects all of them, included in the same word, without difference, to the same sentence? And are we to suppose that there were no men out of these two most exalted nations who aspired to what was meritoriously good? Were there none among them who thus aspired with all the powers of their free will? Yet Paul makes no distinction on this account. He includes them all under wrath, and declares them all to be ungodly and unrighteous. And are we not to believe that all the other apostles, each one according to the work he had to do, included all other nations under this wrath, in the same way of declaration? Section 136 This passage of Paul, therefore, stands firmly and forcibly, urging that free will, even in its most exalted state, in the most exalted men, who were endowed with the law, righteousness, wisdom, and all the virtues, was ungodly and unrighteous and merited the wrath of God? Or the argument of Paul amounts to nothing? And if it stand good, his division leaves no medium. For he makes those who believe the gospel to be under the salvation, and all the rest to be under the wrath of God. He makes the believing to be righteous, and the unbelieving to be ungodly, unrighteous, and under wrath. For the whole that he means to say is this, the righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel, that it might be by faith. But God would be wanting in wisdom, if he should reveal righteousness unto men, when they either knew it already, or had some seeds of it in themselves. Since, however, he is not wanting in wisdom, and yet reveals unto men the righteousness of salvation, it is manifest that free will, even in the most exalted of men, not only has wrought and can work no righteousness, but does not even know what is righteousness before God. Unless you mean to say that the righteousness of God is not revealed unto these most exalted of men, but to the most vile. But the boasting of Paul is quite the contrary, that he is a debtor both to the Jews and to the Greeks, to the wise and to the unwise, to the Greeks and to the barbarians. Wherefore, Paul, comprehending in this passage all men together in one mass, concludes that they are all ungodly, unrighteous, and ignorant of the righteousness of faith. So far is it from possibility that they can will or do anything good. And this conclusion is moreover confirmed from this, that God reveals the righteousness of faith to them as being ignorant and sitting in darkness. Therefore, of themselves they know it not. And if they be ignorant of the righteousness of salvation, they are certainly under wrath and damnation. Nor can they extricate themselves therefrom, nor endeavour to extricate themselves. For how can you endeavour, if you know neither what you are to endeavour after, nor in what way, nor to what extent you are to endeavour? With this conclusion, both the thing itself and experience agree. For show me one of the whole race of mankind, be he the most holy and most just of all men, unto whose mind it ever came that the way unto righteousness and salvation was to believe in him who is both God and man, who died for the sins of men and rose again, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father, that he might still the wrath of God the Father, which Paul here says is revealed from heaven. Look at the most eminent philosophers. What ideas had they of God? What have they left behind them in their writings concerning the wrath to come? Look at the Jews instructed by so many wonders and so many successive prophets. What did they think of this way of righteousness? They not only did not receive it, but so hated it that no nation under heaven has more atrociously persecuted Christ unto this day. And who would dare to say that in so great a people there was not one who cultivated free will and endeavored with all its powers? How comes it to pass, then, that they all endeavor in the directly opposite and that that which was the most excellent and the most excellent of men not only did not follow this way of righteousness, not only did not know it, but even thrust it from them with the greatest hatred and wished to away with it when it was published and revealed? So much so that Paul saith this way was to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Gentiles foolishness. 1 Corinthians 1.23 Since therefore Paul speaks of the Jews and Gentiles without difference, and since it is certain that the Jews and Gentiles comprehend the principal nations under heaven, it is hence certain that free will is nothing else than the greatest enemy to righteousness and the salvation of man. For it is impossible but that there must have been some among the Jews and Gentile Greeks who wrought and endeavored with all the powers of free will and yet by all that endeavoring did nothing but carry on a war against grace. Do you therefore now come forward and say what free will can endeavor towards good when goodness and righteousness themselves are a stumbling block unto it and foolishness? Nor can you say that this applies to some and not all. Paul speaks of all without difference where he says to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Gentiles foolishness. Nor does he accept any but believers. To us, saith he, who are called and saints it is the power of God and the wisdom of God. 1 Corinthians 1.24 He does not say to some Gentiles, to some Jews but plainly to the Gentiles and to the Jews who are not of us. Thus, by a manifest division separating the believing from the unbelieving and leaving no medium whatever. And we are now speaking of Gentiles as working without grace to whom Paul saith the righteousness of God is foolishness and they abhor it. This is that meritorious endeavor of free will towards good. Section 138 See moreover whether Paul himself does not particularize the most exalted among the Greeks where he saith that the wisest among them became vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkened that they became wise in their own conceits that is, by their subtle disputations. Romans 1.21 Does he not hear, I pray you, touch that which was the most exalted and most excellent in the Greeks when he touches their imaginations? For these comprehend their most sublime and exalted thoughts and opinions which they considered as solid wisdom. But he calls that their wisdom as well in other places foolishness as here vain imagination which by its endeavoring only became worse till at last they worshipped an idol in their own darkened hearts and proceeded to the other enormities which he afterwards enumerates. If, therefore, the most exalted and devoted endeavors and works in the most exalted of the nations be evil and ungodly what shall we think of the rest who are, as it were, the commonalty and the vilest of the nations? Nor does Paul here make any difference between those who are the most exalted for he condemns all the devotedness of their wisdom without any respect of persons. And if he condemn their very works and devoted endeavors he condemns those who exert them even though they strive with all the powers of free will. Their most exalted endeavor, I say, is declared to be evil how much more than the persons themselves who exert it. So also, just afterwards he rejects the Jews without any difference who are Jews in the letter and not in the spirit. Thou, saith he, honorest God in the letter and in the circumcision. Again, he is not a Jew which is one outwardly but he is a Jew which is one inwardly. Romans 1, 27-29 What can be more manifest than the division here made? The Jew outwardly is a transgressor of the law. And how many Jews must we suppose there were without the faith who were men the most wise, the most religious, the most honorable who aspired unto righteousness and truth with all the devotion of endeavor? Of these, the apostle continually bears testimony that they had a zeal of God that they followed after righteousness that they strove day and night to attain unto salvation that they lived blameless and yet they are transgressors of the law because they are not Jews in the spirit nay, they determinately resist the righteousness of faith. What conclusion then remains to be drawn but that free will is then the worst when it is the best and that the more it endeavors the worse it becomes and the worse it is? The words are plain the division is certain nothing can be said against it. But let us hear Paul who is his own interpreter in the third chapter drawing up, as it were, a conclusion he saith What then? Are we better than they? No, in no wise for we have before proved both Jews and Greeks that they are all under sin Romans 3, 9 Where is now free will? All, saith he, both Jews and Greeks are under sin Are there any tropes or difficulties here? What would the invented interpretations of the whole world do against this all clear sentence? He who says all accepts none and he who describes them all as being under sin, that is, the servants of sin leaves them no degree of good whatever But where has he given this proof that they are all, both Jews and Gentiles, under sin? Nowhere but where I have already shown namely, where he saith The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men This he proves to them afterwards from experience showing them that being hated of God they were given up to so many vices in order that they might be convinced from the fruits of their ungodliness that they willed and did nothing but evil And then he judges the Jews also separately where he saith that the Jew in the letter is a transgressor of the law which he proves in like manner from the fruits and from experience saying Thou who declarest that a man should not steal stealest thyself and thou who abhorrest idols commitest sacrilege thus accepting none whatever but those who are Jews in the spirit Section 140 But let us see how Paul proves his sentiments out of the Holy Scriptures and whether the passages which he adduces are made to have more force in Paul than they have in their own places As it is written, saith he There is none righteous, no, not one There is none that understandeth There is none that seeketh after God They are all gone out of the way They are all together become unprofitable There is none that doeth good, no, not one and so forth Romans 3, 10-23 Here, let him that can produce his convenient interpretation invent tropes and pretend that the words are ambiguous and obscure Let him that dares defend free will against these damnable doctrines Then I will at once give up all and recant and will myself become a confessor and asserter of free will It is certain that these words apply to all men for the prophet introduces God as looking down from heaven upon men and pronouncing this sentence upon them So also, Psalm 14, 2-3 God looked down from heaven upon the children of men to see if there were any that did understand and seek after God But they are all gone out of the way and so forth And that the Jews might not imagine that this did not apply to them by anticipation and asserts that it applied to them most particularly, saying We know that what thing soever the law saith it saith to them that are under the law Romans 3, 19 And his intention is the same where he saith to the Jew first and also to the Greek You hence hear that all the sons of men all that are under the law that is, the Gentiles as well as the Jews are accounted before God ungodly not understanding not seeking after God no, not even one of them being all gone out of the way and become unprofitable And surely among all the children of men and those who are under the law those must also be numbered who are the best and most laudable who aspire after that which is meritorious and good with all the powers of free will And those also of whom the diatribe boasts as having the sense and certain seeds of good implanted in them unless it means to contend that they are the children of angels How then can they endeavor toward good who are all without exception ignorant of God and neither regard nor seek after God How can they have a power able to attain unto good who all without exception decline from good and become utterly unprofitable Are not the words most clear and do they not declare this that all men are ignorant of God and despise God and then turn unto evil and become unprofitable unto good For Paul is not here speaking of the ignorance of seeking food or the contempt of money but of the ignorance and contempt of religion and of godliness And that ignorance and contempt most undoubtedly are not in the flesh that is, as you interpret it the inferior and grosser affections but in the most exalted and most noble powers of men in which righteousness, godliness the knowledge and reverence of God ought to reign that is, in the reason and in the will and thus in the very power of free will in the very seed of good in that which is the most excellent in man Where are you now friend Erasmus you who promised that you would freely acknowledge that the most excellent faculty in man is flesh that is, ungodly if it should be proved from the scriptures Acknowledge now then when you hear that the most excellent faculty in man is not only ungodly but ignorant of God existing in the contempt of God turned to evil and unable to turn towards good For what is it to be unrighteous but for the will which is one of the most noble faculties in man to be unrighteous What is it to understand nothing either of God or good but for the reason which is another of the most noble faculties in man, to be ignorant of God and good, that is to be blind to the knowledge of godliness What is it to be gone out of the way and to have become unprofitable but for men to have no power in one single faculty and the least power in their most noble faculties to turn unto good but only to turn unto evil What is it not to fear God but for men to be in all their faculties and most of all in their noblest faculties contenders of all the things of God of his words, his works his laws, his precepts and his will What then can reason propose that is right who is thus blind and ignorant What can the will choose that is good which is thus evil and impotent Nay, what can the will pursue where the reason can propose nothing but the darkness of its own blindness and ignorance and where the reason is thus erroneous and the will averse, what can the man either do or attempt that is good Section 151 But perhaps someone may here sophistically observe though the will be gone out of the way and the reason be ignorant as to the perfection of the act, yet the will can make some attempt and the reason can attain to some knowledge by its own powers seeing that we can attempt many things which we cannot perfect and we are here speaking of the existence of a power not of the perfection of the act I answer The words of the prophet comprehend both the act and the power for his saying man seeks not God is the same as if he had said man cannot seek God, which you may collect from this If there were a power or ability in man to will good it could not be but that as the motion of the divine omnipotence could not suffer it to remain actionless or to keep holiday as I before observed, it must be moved forth into act in some man at least in some one man or another and must be made manifest so as to afford an example but this is not the case, for God looks down from heaven and does not see even one who seeks after him or attempts it, wherefore it follows that that power is nowhere to be found which attempts or wills to attempt to seek after him and that all men are gone out of the way moreover if Paul be not understood to speak at the same time of impotency his disputation will amount to nothing for Paul's whole design is to make grace necessary unto all men whereas if they could make some sort of beginning themselves grace would not be necessary but now, since they cannot make that beginning, grace is necessary hence you see that free will is by this passage utterly abolished and nothing meritorious or good whatever left in man seeing that he is declared to be unrighteous ignorant of God, a contemner of God, averse to God and unprofitable in the sight of God and the words of the prophet are sufficiently forcible both in their own place and in Paul who adduces them, nor is it an inconsiderable assertion when men are said to be ignorant of and to despise God for these are the fountain springs of all iniquities, the sink of all sins, and the hell of all evils what evil is there not where there are ignorance and contempt of God in a word, the whole kingdom of Satan in men could not be defined in fewer or more expressive words than by saying they are ignorant of and despise God for there is unbelief, there is disobedience, there is sacrilege there is blasphemy against God, there is cruelty and a want of mercy towards our neighbour there is the love of self in all the things of God and man here you have a description of the glory and power of free will section 142 Paul however proceeds and testifies that he now expressly speaks with reference to all men, and to those more especially who are the greatest and most exalted saying that every mouth may be stopped and all the world become guilty before God for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight Romans 3 19-20 how I pray you shall every mouth be stopped if there be still a power remaining by which we can do something for one might then say to God, that which is here in the world is not altogether nothing, there is that here which you cannot damn even that to which you yourself gave the power of doing something the mouth of this at least will not be stopped, for it cannot be obnoxious to you for if there be any sound power in free will and it be able to do something to say that the whole world is obnoxious to or guilty before God is false for that power whose mouth is not to be stopped cannot be an inconsiderable thing, or a something in one small part of the world only, but a thing most conspicuous and most general throughout the whole world or, if its mouth be to be stopped, then it must be obnoxious to and guilty before God together with the whole world but how can it rightly be called guilty if it be not unrighteous and ungodly, that is meriting punishment and vengeance let your friends I pray you, find out by what convenient interpretation that power of man is to be cleared from this charge of guilt by which the whole world is declared guilty before God, or by what contrivance it is to be accepted from being comprehended in the expression, all the world these words, they are all gone out of the way there is none righteous no, not one are mighty thunderclaps and riving thunderbolts they are in reality that hammer breaking the rock in pieces mentioned by Jeremiah, by which is broken in pieces everything that is not in one man only nor in some men, nor in a part of men, but in the whole world no one man being accepted so that the whole world ought at those words to tremble to fear, and to flee away for what words more awful or fearful could be uttered than these the whole world is guilty all the sons of men are turned out of the way, and become unprofitable there is no one that fears God, there is no one that is not unrighteous, there is no one that understandeth, there is no one that seeketh after God nevertheless such ever has been and still is the hardness and insensible obstinacy of our hearts, that we never should of ourselves hear or feel the force of these thunderclaps or thunderbolts, but should even while they were sounding in our ears, exalt and establish free will with all its powers in defiance of them, and thus in reality fulfill that of Malachi 1 4, they build, but I will throw down with the same power of words also is this said by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight by the deeds of the law is a forcible expression as is also this the whole world, and this all the children of men for it is to be observed that Paul abstains from the mention of persons, and mentions their ways only, that is that he might comprehend all persons and whatever in them is most excellent, whereas if he had said the commonalty of the Jews or the Pharisees or certain of the ungodly are not justified, he might have seemed to leave some accepted who from the power of free will in them, and by a certain aid from the law were not altogether unprofitable, but now when he condemns the works of the law themselves, and makes them unrighteous in the sight of God it becomes manifest that he condemns all who were mighty in a devoted observance of the law and of works and none devotedly observed the law and the works but the best and most excellent among them, nor did they thus observe them but with their best and most exalted faculties, that is their reason and their will if therefore those who exercise themselves in the observance of the law and of works, with all the devoted strivings and endeavorings, both of reason and of will, that is with all the power of free will and who were assisted by the law as a divine aid, and were instructed out of it, and roused to exertion by it if I say these are condemned of impiety because they are not justified, and are declared to be flesh in the sight of God what then will there be left in the whole race of mankind which is not flesh, and which is not ungodly? For all are condemned alike who are of the works of the law, and whether they exercise themselves in the law with the utmost devotion or moderate devotion, or with no devotion at all, it matters nothing. None of them could do anything but work the works of the law, and the works of the law do not justify. And if they do not justify, they prove their workmen to be ungodly, and leave them so. And if they be ungodly, they are guilty, and merit the wrath of God. These things are so clear, that no one can open his mouth against them. Section 143 But many elude and evade Paul by saying that he here calls the ceremonial works works of the law, which works after the death of Christ were dead. I answer, this is that notable error and ignorance of Jerome, which, although Augustine strenuously resisted it, yet by the withdrawing of God and the prevailing of Satan has found its way throughout the world, and has continued down to this day, by means of which it has come to pass that it has been impossible to understand Paul, and the knowledge of Christ has consequently been obscured. Therefore, if there had been no other error in the church, this one might have been sufficiently pestilent and powerful to destroy the gospel. For which Jerome, if peculiar grace did not interpose, has deserved hell rather than heaven. So far am I from daring to canonize him, or call him a saint. But however, it is not truth that Paul is here speaking of the ceremonial works only. For if that be the case, how will his argument stand good, whereby he concludes that all are unrighteous and need grace? But perhaps you will say, be it so that we are not justified by the ceremonial works, yet one might be justified by the moral works of the Decalogue. By this syllogism of yours, then, you have proved that to such grace is not necessary. If this be the case, how very useful must that grace be, which delivers us from the ceremonial works only, the easiest of all works which may be extorted from us through mere fear or self-love. And this, moreover, is erroneous, that ceremonial works are dead and unlawful since the death of Christ. Paul never said any such thing. He says that they do not justify, and that they profit the man nothing in the sight of God, so as to make him free from unrighteousness. Holding this truth, anyone may do them, and yet do nothing that is unlawful. Thus, to eat and to drink are works which do not justify or recommend us to God, and yet he who eats and drinks does not therefore do that which is unlawful. These men err also in this. The ceremonial works were as much commanded and exacted in the old law and in the Decalogue as the moral works, and therefore the latter had neither more nor less force than the former. For Paul is here speaking principally to the Jews, as he saith Romans 1, wherefore let no one doubt that by the works of the law here all the works of the whole law are to be understood. For if the law be abrogated and dead, they cannot be called the works of the law, for an abrogated or dead law is no longer a law, and that Paul knew full well. Therefore he does not speak of the law abrogated when he speaks of the works of the law, but of the law in force and authority. Otherwise, how easy would it have been for him to say, the law is now abrogated, and then he would have spoken openly and clearly. But let us bring forward Paul himself, who is the best interpreter of himself. He saith, Galatians 3.10, As many as are of the works of the law are under the curse, for it is written, Cursed is everyone that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them. You see that Paul here, where he is urging the same point as he is in his epistle to the Romans, and in the same words, speaks wherever he makes mention of the works of the law, of all the laws that are written in the book of the law. And what is still more worthy of remark? Paul himself cites Moses, who curses those that continue not in the law, whereas he himself curses those who are of the works of the law, thus adducing a testimony of a different scope from that of his own sentiment, the former being in the negative, the latter in the affirmative. But this he does because the real state of the case is such in the sight of God that those who are the most devoted to the works of the law are the farthest from fulfilling the law, as being without the Spirit who only is the fulfiller of the law, which such may attempt to fulfill by their own powers, but they will affect nothing after all. Wherefore both declarations are true, that of Moses, that they are accursed who continue not in the works of the law, and that of Paul, that they are accursed who are of the works of the law. For both characters of persons require the Spirit, without which the works of the law, how many an excellence soever they may be, justify not, as Paul saith. Wherefore neither character of persons continue in all things that are written, as Moses saith. Section 144 In a word Paul by this division of his fully confirms that which I maintain. For he divides law-working men into two classes, those who work after the Spirit, and those who work after the flesh, leaving no medium whatever. He speaks thus, By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified. Romans 3.20 What is this but saying, that those whose works profit them not, work the works of the law without the Spirit, as being themselves flesh, that is, unrighteousness and ignorant of God. So Galatians 3.2, making the same division, he saith, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Again, Romans 3.21 But now the righteousness of God is manifest without the law. And again, Romans 3.28, we conclude therefore, that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law. From all which it is manifest and clear, that in Paul the Spirit is set in opposition to the works of the law, as well as to all other things which are not spiritual, including all the powers of and everything pertaining to the flesh. So that the meaning of Paul is evidently the same as that of Christ. John 3.6 That everything which is not of the Spirit is flesh, be it ever so precious, holy, and great. Nay, be they works of the divine law the most excellent, and wrought by all the powers imaginable. For the Spirit of Christ is wanting, without which all things are nothing short of being damnable. Let it then be a settled point, that Paul by the works of the law means not the ceremonial works, but the works of the whole law. Then this will be a settled point also, that in the works of the law everything is condemned that is without the Spirit. And without the Spirit is that power of free will. For that is the point in dispute, that most exalted faculty in man. For to be of the works of the law is the most exalted state in which man can be. The apostle therefore does not say who are of sins, and of ungodliness against the law, but who are of the works of the law, that is, who are the best of men, and the most devoted to the law, and who are in addition to the power of free will, even assisted, that is, instructed and roused into action by the law itself. If therefore free will, assisted by the law, and exercising all its powers in the law, profit nothing and justify not, but be left in sin and in the flesh, what must we suppose it able to do when left to itself without the law? By the law, saith Paul, is the knowledge of sin, Romans 3.20. Here he shows how much and how far the law profits, that free will is of itself so blind that it does not even know what is sin, but has need of the law for its teacher. And what can that man do towards taking away sin who does not even know what is sin? All that he can do is to mistake that which is sin for that which is no sin, and that which is no sin for that which is sin. And this experience sufficiently proves. How does the world, by the medium of those whom it accounts the most excellent and the most devoted to righteousness and piety, hate and persecute the righteousness of God preached in the gospel, and brand it with the name of heresy, error, and every appropriate appellation, while it boasts of and sets forth its own works and devices, which are really sin and error, as righteousness and wisdom? By this Scripture, therefore, Paul stops the mouth of free will, where he teaches that by the law its sin is discovered unto it, of which sin it was before ignorant. So far is he from conceding to it any power or whatever to attempt that which is good. Section 145 And here is solved that question of the diatribe so often repeated throughout its book. If we can do nothing, to what purpose are so many laws, so many precepts, so many threatenings, and so many promises? Paul here gives an answer. By the law is the knowledge of sin. His answer is far different from that which would enter the thoughts of man or of free will. He does not say by the law is proved free will because it cooperates with it unto righteousness. For righteousness is not by the law, but by the law is the knowledge of sin, seeing that the effect, the work, in the office of the law is to be a light to the ignorant and the blind, such a light as discovers to them disease, sin, evil, death, hell, and the wrath of God, though it does not deliver from these, but shows them only. And when a man is thus brought to a knowledge of the disease of sin, he is cast down, is afflicted, nay, despairs. The law does not help him, much less can he help himself. Another light is necessary, which might discover to him the remedy. This is the voice of the gospel, revealing Christ as the deliverer from all these evils. Neither free will nor reason can discover him. And how should it discover him, when it is itself dark and devoid, even in the light of the law? Which might discover to it its disease? Which disease in its own light it seeth not, but believes it to be sound health? So also in Galatians 3, treating on the same point, he saith, Wherefore then serveth the law? To which he answers, not as the diatribe does, in a way that proves the existence of free will, but he saith, It was added because of transgressions, until the seed should come to whom the promise was made. Galatians 3.19 He saith, Because of transgressions, not, however, to restrain them as Jerome dreams, for Paul shows that to take away and to restrain sins by the gift of righteousness was that which was promised to the seed to come, but to cause transgressions to abound, as he saith, Romans 5.20 The law entered that sin might abound. Not that sins were not committed and did not abound without the law, but they were not known to be transgressions and sins of such magnitude. For the most and greatest of them were considered to be righteousnesses. And while sins are thus unknown, there is no place for remedy or for hope, because they will not submit to the hand of the healer, considering themselves to be whole, and not to want a physician. Therefore the law is necessary, which might give the knowledge of sin, in order that he who is proud and whole in his own eyes, being humbled down into the knowledge of the iniquity and greatness of his sin, might groan and breathe after the grace that is laid up in Christ. Only observe, therefore, the simplicity of the words. By the law is the knowledge of sin. And yet these alone are of force sufficient to confound and overthrow free will altogether. For if it be true that of itself it knows not what is sin and what is evil, as the Apostle saith here, and Romans 7, 7 through 8, I should not have known that concupiscence was sin, except the law had said thou shalt not covet. How can it ever know what is righteousness and good? And if it know not what righteousness is, how can it endeavor to attain unto it? We know not the sin in which we were born, in which we live, in which we move and exist, and which lives, moves, and reigns in us. How then should we know that righteousness which is without us, and which reigns in heaven? These works bring that miserable thing free will to nothing, nothing at all. End of section 145