Bible Verses and Early Church Commentary | Historical Christian Faith

¹ What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? ² Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. ³ For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? ⁴ God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. ⁵ But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a man) ⁶ God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? ⁷ For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? ⁸ And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just. ⁹ What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; ¹⁰ As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: ¹¹ There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. ¹² They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. ¹³ Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: ¹⁴ Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: ¹⁵ Their feet are swift to shed blood: ¹⁶ Destruction and misery are in their ways: ¹⁷ And the way of peace have they not known: ¹⁸ There is no fear of God before their eyes. ¹⁹ Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. ²⁰ Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. ²¹ But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; ²² Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: ²³ For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; ²⁴ Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: ²⁵ Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; ²⁶ To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. ²⁷ Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. ²⁸ Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. ²⁹ Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also: ³⁰ Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. ³¹ Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:1

Since he has set all aside, the hearing, the teaching, the name of the Jew, the circumcision, and all the other particulars by his saying that "he is not a Jew which is one outwardly, but he which is one inwardly;" he next sees an objection which starts up, and against this makes his stand. Now what is this objection? If, he means, these things are no use, what reason was there for that nation being called, and the circumcision too being given? What does he then and how does he solve it? By the same means as he did before: for as there, he told, not of their praises, but the benefits of God; nor their well doings (for to be called a Jew and to know His Will and to approve the things which are more excellent, was no well doing of their own, but came of the grace of God: and this the Prophet also says, upbraiding them; "He has not done so to any nation, neither has he showed His judgments unto them;" [Psalm 147:20] and Moses again; "Ask now whether there has been any such thing as this?" he says, "did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, and live?") [Deuteronomy 4:32-33], this then he does here also. For as, when speaking of circumcision, he did not say, Circumcision is valueless without a good life, but, Circumcision is of value with a good life, pointing out the same thing but in a more subdued tone. And again he does not say, If you be a breaker of the Law, thou who art circumcised art no whit profited, but "your circumcision is made uncircumcision:" and after this again, "the uncircumcision," says he, shall "judge," not the circumcision, but "you that dost transgress the Law," so sparing the things of the Law, and smiting the persons. So he does here also. For after setting before himself this objection, and saying, "what advantage then has the Jew?" he says not, None, but he concurs with the statement, and confutes it again by the sequel, and shows that they were even punished owing to this preëminence. And how he does so, I will tell you when I have stated the objection. "What advantage then," he says, "has the Jew," or "what profit is there of circumcision?"

Source: Homily 6 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:1

If Paul means that there is no use in being a Jew or in circumcision, why was that nation called, and why was circumcision given? How does Paul solve this problem? By the same means as he did before: he speaks not of their praises but of the benefits of God.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6

[AD 1274] Thomas Aquinas on Romans 3:1

After showing that Judaism, which involved receiving the Law and circumcision, is not sufficient for salvation without the Law’s observance, through which the Gentile without external Judaism and circumcision obtains the fruit of each [n. 163 and 210], he now objects to his own doctrine: 129 first, he presents the objection; secondly, he answers it, there [v. 2; n. 248] at Much in every way. 247. First, he objects: If what I say is so, i.e., that the true Jew and true circumcision are not something outward but inward in the heart, then what advantage has the Jew, i.e., what has been given to him more than to others? It seems to be nothing. But this is not fitting, since the Lord had said: "The Lord, your God, has chosen you to be a people for his own possession" (Dt 7:6). Or what is the value of circumcision, i.e., outward? It seems from his previous teaching that there is no value. But this is not fitting, since it was imposed by God, Who says: "I am the Lord, your God, who teaches you unto profit" (Is 48:17). 248. Then when he says Much in every way (v. 2) he answers the objection: first, in regard to Judaism’s prerogative; secondly, in regard to the value of circumcision, in chapter 4, there [n. 322] at What therefore shall we say? In regard to the first he does two things: first, he shows Judaism’s prerogative; secondly, he rejects their boasting over the Gentiles, there [v. 9; n. 271] at What then?. In regard to the first he does three things: first, he states his position; secondly, he explains it, there [v. 2b; n. 250] at First indeed; thirdly, he excludes an objection, there [v. 3; n. 251] at What if some. 130 249. First, therefore, he says: the question is raised what advantage has the Jew. The advantage is both quantitative, which is indicated when he says, much, and numerical, which is indicated when he says, in every way. For they have an advantage both in contemplating divine matters: "In Judah God is known" (Ps 76:1) and in the provision of temporal things: "He has not dealt thus with any other nation" (Ps 147:20). They have further advantages relating to their ancestors, to the promises and to their offspring: "They are Israelites, and to them belong the sonship, the glory, the covenant" (Rom 9:4). In each of these there is no small advantage, but great and important ones, which are summed up when he says, much. For man’s greatest good lies in knowing God, in clinging to God and in being instructed by God: "Blessed is the man whom thou dost teach out of thy law" (Ps 93:12). 250. Then when he says First indeed he explains his statement, saying: First indeed, i.e., the chief advantage is that to them are entrusted the oracles of God, being His friends: "I have called you friends" (Jn 15:15). This is important, because the oracles of God are trustworthy: "The ordinances of the Lord are true and righteous altogether" (Ps 19:9) and pleasant: "How sweet are thy words to my taste" (Ps 119:103) and useful for avoiding sin: "I have laid up thy word in my heart, that I may not sin against thee" (Ps 119:11). 251. Then when he says What if some were unfaithful (v.3) he excludes an objection: first, he presents it; 131 secondly, he rejects it by showing its consequences, there [v. 3b; n. 253] at Does their faithlessness; thirdly, by showing that the consequence is unfitting, there [v. 4b; n. 254] at But God is true. 252. Someone could belittle the Jews’ prerogative by citing their ingratitude, through which they would seem to have set aside the value of God’s message. Hence he says, what if some were unfaithful? Does this show that the Jew has no advantage, especially in the light of 2 Pt (2:21): "It would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandments delivered to them." For they did not believe the Lawgiver: "They had no faith in his promises" (Ps 106:24) or the prophets: "They are a rebellious house" (Ez 2:6) or the Son of God: "If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?" (Jn 8:46). 253. Then when he says Does their faithlessness (v3b) he excludes this objection by showing the unsuitable conclusion it engenders. For if the Jews’ prerogative were taken away on account of the unbelief of some, it would follow that man’s unbelief would nullify God’s faithfulness -- which is an unacceptable conclusion. This is what he says: Does their unfaithfulness, namely, of those who have not believed, nullify the faithfulness of God? This can be understood in two ways: in one way, as referring to the faith by which one believes in God. For the faith of believers is not nullified by those who have not believed, because the evil in some members of society does not nullify the good in other members: "Some of them he blessed and exalted and some of them he made holy and 132 brought near to himself; some he cursed and brought low, and he turned them out of their place" (Si 33:12). This is against those of whom Augustine says in The Letter to the People of Hippo: "What other motive inspires them and what else do they discuss save that when a bishop or cleric or monk or nun falls, they believe that all are such, but not all can be exposed?" In another way, it can be understood as referring to the faith with which God is faithful in keeping His promises: "He who promised is faithful" (Heb 10:23). This faithfulness would be nullified, if it happened that the Jews had no advantage, just because some have not believed. For God promised to multiply that people and make it great: "I will multiply your descendants" (Gen 22:l6). 254. Then when he says, Let it not be!, he shows that it is unfitting for God’s faithfulness to be nullified on account of men’s unbelief. First, he gives a reason for this; secondly, he cites a text, there [4b; n. 256] at As it is written; thirdly, be excludes a false understanding of this text, there [v. 5; n. 262] at But if our injustice. 255. The reason is based on the fact that God in Himself is true: "The Lord is the true God" (Jer 10:10); "This is the true God and life eternal" (1 Jn 5:20); though every man be false: "I said in my consternation, ‘Men are all a vain hope’" (Ps 116:11). Hence, it is plain that man’s mendacity or unbelief in not adhering to the truth does not nullify God’s truth or faithfulness. This is easier to understand, if we consider that truth implies agreement between thing and understanding. But things are in agreement with our understanding in one way 133 and with God’s in another way. For our intellect derives its knowledge from things; consequently, the cause and measure of our truth stems from the thing’s being. For an opinion is called true or false depending on whether the thing is as stated or is not. Hence, our understanding can be true or it can be false, for it can be in agreement or disagreement. But whatever is open to being or not being needs someone acting to make it be; otherwise, it continues not to be. For as air without something illuminating it remains dark, so our intellect by itself, unless it is enlightened by the first truth, continues in falseness. Hence, of himself every man is false in his intellect and is true only in virtue of participating in the divine truth: "Send out thy light and thy truth" (Ps 43:3). The divine intellect, on the other hand, is the cause and measure of things. For this reason it is of itself unfailingly true, and everything else is true inasmuch as it conforms to that intellect. Similarly, considering truth on the part of the thing, man of himself does not have truth, because his nature is convertible into nothing. Only the divine nature, which is not produced from nothing or convertible into nothing, has of itself truth. 256. Then when he says, As it is written, he proves his statement on the authority of a text in Ps 51 (v.4): That thou mayest be justified in thy words and prevail when thou art judged. How this is to the point can be gathered from considering what the Psalmist had said just ahead of it For he says just before this, "Against thee, thee only, have I sinned," and then: "So that thou art justified in thy sentence and blameless in thy judgment." For God through the prophet Nathan had promised David that He would establish his kingdom forever in his seed, as is gathered from 2 Sam (7:16). But later, when he fell into serious 134 sin, namely, adultery and murder (2 Sam 11:2 ff), some said that on account of these sins God would not keep the promises made to him. 257. Hence, the Psalmist’s intention bears on two things. First, that God’s justice, which involves keeping His promises, is not changed on account of sin. Touching on this he says, that thou mayest be justified in thy words, i.e., that You may be shown just in your words, since You do not disregard them because of my sins: "All the words of my mouth are righteous" (Pr 8:8); "The Lord is faithful in all his words" (Ps 145:13). Secondly, that God’s promise imitates men’s judgment. And this is what he says, and prevail, namely, by keeping Your promise, when thou art judged, namely, by men, that on account of my sins You did not keep Your promises: "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good" (Rom 12:21), which is said to men. Accordingly, it is truer of God. 258. It should be noted that God’s promise to David was to be fulfilled in Christ’s incarnation. Hence it was a predestinative prophecy, in which something is promised as destined to be fulfilled in every way; whereas something promised or foretold by a prophecy of warning is not predicted as destined to be fulfilled in every way but according to men’s merits, which can change. Therefore, if the promise made to David had not been fulfilled, it would have been prejudicial to God’s justice; whereas the non-fulfillment of a promise made through a prophecy of warning is not prejudicial to God’s justice, but indicates a change in deserts. Hence it is written in Jer (18:7): "If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a 135 kingdom that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, and if that nation turns from its evil, I will repent of the evil that I intended to do to it." Therefore, it is plain, according to this sense, that man’s sin does not exclude God’s faithfulness. 259. Other senses of this text are presented in the Gloss [of Lombard, col. 1352], but they are not closely related to the Apostle’s intention. The first is that these words are linked with the words, "Wash me more thoroughly from my iniquity" (v. 4) to the end "that you may be justified," i.e., appear just, "in thy words," in which You promised pardon to sinners not only in Ezekiel, because these words antedated that, but also in Lev (26:41): "If they make amends for their iniquity, then I will remember my covenant," and Dt (30:1): "If, lead by repentance of heart, you turn to God, the Lord your God will bring you back, and have compassion on you." Thus "may you prevail when you are judged" by men that you ought not pardon me. 260. Secondly these words are connected with the verse, "Against you only have I sinned," i.e., in comparison with you who alone are just. And this is what he means when he says "that you may be justified," i.e., by you may appear just in comparison to me and other sinners: "The Lord is just, and loves justice" (Ps 10:8), and this not only in deeds but also in your words, which is the greatest of all according to Jam 3(:2), "If anyone does not offend in word." "And that you may overcome when you are judged," i.e., when you are compared to anyone else in judgment: "Judge between me and my vineyard" (Is 5:3). 261. Third, these words are referred to Christ, Who alone is without sin: "He committed no sin; no guile was found on his lips" (2 Pt 2:22) and is, therefore, justified in 136 His words as compared to all men. And you prevail over sin, death and the devil: "The Lion of the tribe of Judah has conquered" (Rev 5:5), when you are judged unjustly by Pilate: "Thy cause has been judged as that of the wicked" (Jb 36:17). 262. Then when he says, But if our wickedness, he excludes a false understanding of the text he cited. For someone might understand these words according to the sense that "that" [ut] would be taken in a causal, not a consecutive, sense. Then it would follow that man’s sin would be directly ordained to commend God’s justice. But the Apostle shows that this is false. Hence he says that "that" is used consecutively, on the ground that David sinned and then the manifestation of divine justice followed, but not causally, as if a man’s sin commended God’s justice. He proves this by showing that it leads to something unfitting in two ways: first, on the part of divine judgment; secondly, on the part of human judgment [v. 7; n. 267]. In regard to the first he does three things: first, he presents the false sense; secondly, he shows that something unfitting follows from this, there [v. 5b; n. 264] at What then shall we say? Is God unjust; thirdly, he shows that it is unfitting, there [v. 6; n. 265] at Let it not be! 263. It should be noted that above (v.4) the Apostle had made two comparisons; in the first he compared divine truth to human falsity when he said: "Let God be true, though every man be false"; in the second, God’s justice to human sin, in the words of Ps 137 51 (v.4), where it is said: "Against thee, thee only, have I sinned.... That thou mayest be justified." In regard to the first comparison he says: If these words are taken to mean that our iniquity directly commends God’s justice, what shall we say? In other words, we could not accept the inconvenience that follows. For sin is not necessary for God to have His justice commended: "He does not desire a multitude of faithless and useless children" (Si 16:1). 264. He expresses the inconvenience that follows, when he says: Is God who inflicts wrath on us, i.e., vengeance for sin, unjust? For this follows from the supposition. For if sin were directly ordained to commending justice, it would not be deserving of punishment but of reward. Consequently, God would be unjust in punishing men for sin, contrary to what is stated in Dt (32:4): "God is faithful and without iniquity." 265. He rejects this inconvenience, when he says, Let it not be that is God unjust. I speak according to man, i.e., I say these words not from my understanding but from that of a man in error, as is stated in 1 Cor (3:3): "For while there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not of the flesh?" 266. He shows that this must not be admitted, adding: For then, namely, if God is unjust, how could God judge the world, i.e., how could He be the universal and supreme judge of the world? For it is necessary that the first and highest item in every class be unerring, just as the first mover is unchangeable. Hence it is written in Ps 96 (v.13): "I will judge the world with righteousness." 138 A like argument is presented in Jb (34:12): "Of a truth God will not do wickedly, and the Almighty will not pervert justice. Who gave him charge over the earth and who laid on him the whole world?" In other words: If He were not to judge justly, it would be necessary to suppose that someone else is judge of the world. 267. Then when he says For if the truth (v.7) he shows the same on the part of human judgment. He does three things: first, he presents the false understanding of the above words; secondly, he shows the inconvenience that follows, there [v. 7b; n. 269] at Why am I sill; thirdly, he shows that it is inconvenient, there [v. 8b; n. 270] at Their condemnation. 268. He expresses the false understanding according to the comparison of divine truth to human falsity, when he says: But if through my falsehood, i.e., on account of my falsity, God’s truthfulness, being manifested, abounds to his glory, man’s falsity directly obtains an increase of glory. This is contrary to what is stated in Jb (13:7): "Does God need you to speak deceitfully for him?" 269. Then he adds two inconveniences that follow: one is that man should not be regarded a sinner for lying, on the ground that it is directly ordained to God’s glory. And this is what he says: Why am I still, i.e., even now, being condemned by men as a sinner for being false: "Whereas wickedness is fearful, it bears witness of its condemnation" (Wis 17:8), because sinners are condemned by the judgment of all. 139 The other inconvenience is that it lends support to the false accusation leveled against the apostles. For they preached that through the abounding grace of Christ the debt for an abundance of sins was paid, as is stated below: (5:20): "Where sin increased, grace abounded all the more." For this the apostles were blasphemed, as if preaching that men should do evil in order that good be obtained. This would follow, if man’s falsehood directly commended God’s grace and truth. Therefore, he says: and why not do evil by sinning and teaching falsehood, that good may come, i.e., that God’s truth and justice be commended, as some people slanderously charge us: "When slandered, we try to conciliate" (1 Cor 4:13) with saying by twisting our words: "Which the ignorant and unstable twit to their own destruction" (2 Pt 3:16). 270. He rejects these inconveniences when he says, Their condemnation is just, i.e., those who do evil that good may come. For just as it is not correct to deduce truth from falsity, so it is wrong to reach a good end through evil means: "Why does the way of the wicked prosper? Why do all who are treacherous thrive?" (Jer 12:1). Or their, namely, those who accuse us of this falsely, condemnation is just. For perverters of sacred doctrine are justly condemned: "If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book" (Rev 22:18).

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:2

Even though the oracles of God are now entrusted to the Gentiles as well, they were first entrusted to the Jews, as Paul says. Is he speaking here of the letters and the books or of the meaning and the general gist of the law? For we see many Jews who from infancy to old age never stop studying, yet they never come to a knowledge of the truth. How can it be true that they have some advantage in having been entrusted with the oracles of God first, when they do not understand “what they are saying or the things about which they are making assertions?” … It must be understood that these things are being said about Moses, the prophets and others like them, to whom the oracles of God were entrusted, because there can be no doubt that they were Jews and that they had the circumcision. It would also apply to anyone who was wise, an intelligent listener or a gifted counselor. These the Lord is said to have removed from Jerusalem because he was offended by the ungodliness of the people. … Even the apostles of Christ and Paul himself, the vessel of election, came from the Jews and from the circumcision. He had far more in every way than those whom he taught who were of the Gentiles. For the oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews.Note moreover that Paul says that the oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews, not merely the letter of the text. So it is possible for us to understand that those who read but do not understand, as well as those who read but do not believe, have had only the letter entrusted to them, of which the apostle says: “The letter kills.” But the oracles of God are entrusted to those who understand and believe what Moses wrote and who believe in Christ, as the Lord said: “If you believed Moses you would believe me, for he wrote of me.”5
But if the Jew has received more in receiving the letter and something more in the oracles of God, does this mean that those of the Gentiles who have come to Christ are somehow left out? Or is there some way in which they have more than the Jews? Listen to what the Lord says to the Gentile centurion who believed: “Truly I say to you, I have not found such faith even in Israel.” Therefore you see that when it comes to faith, the Gentiles have much more.… When it comes to the letter, the Jews have much more in every way, but when it comes to faith, it is the Gentiles who have much more.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 360] Eusebius of Emesa on Romans 3:2

When Paul says “To begin with,” he does not go on to list a second or third item. He means rather that what he begins with is comprehensive of all good things. For what could be better than to believe the words of God?

Source: PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:2

Although Paul says that there are many things which pertain to the honor and merit of the seed of Abraham, he records only one of them openly, because it is their greatest boast: They were judged worthy to receive the law, by which they learned to distinguish right from wrong. Only after that was it possible for the value of other things to be understood. But as far as the Jews according to the flesh are concerned (that is, the unbelievers among them), Paul shows that the witness of their race is of no advantage to them. But so as not to appear to be treating them all, including the believers among them, badly, he teaches that the law is very useful to Jewish believers, because they are children of Abraham.For it was to them that the oracles of God were entrusted. It is by the merits of their ancestors that they received the law and were called God’s people.… Egypt was hit by different plagues because of the wrongs which it did to them. They dined on heavenly manna;10 they were a terror to all nations, as Rahab the harlot bore witness. Moreover, it was to them that Christ the Savior was promised for their sanctification. Therefore Paul says that in many ways it was useful to the Jews, because they were the children of Abraham and came before the Gentiles.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:2

Do you see that, as I said above, it is not their well doings, but the benefits of God, that he everywhere counts up? And what is the word ἐ πιστεύθησαν]? (they were trusted.) It means, that they had the Law put into their hands because He held them to be of so much account that He entrusted to them oracles which came down from above. I know indeed that some take the "entrusted" not of the Jews, but of the oracles, as much as to say, the Law was believed in. But the context does not admit of this being held good. For in the first place he is saying this with a view to accuse them, and to show that, though in the enjoyment of many a blessing from above, they yet showed great ingratitude. Then, the context also makes this clear. For he goes on to say, "For what if some did not believe?" If they did not believe, how do some say, the oracles were believed in? What does he mean then? Why that God entrusted the same to them, and not that they trusted to the oracles: how else will the context make sense? For he farther goes on to say [Romans 3:3]

Source: Homily 6 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:2

What does entrusted mean? It means that the Jews had the law put into their hands because God thought so highly of them that he entrusted them with oracles which came down from on high. I know that some people take the entrusted not of the Jews but of the oracles, as if to say: “The law was believed in.” But the context does not allow this interpretation. For in the first place he is saying this in order to accuse them and to show that, in spite of the fact that they enjoyed many blessings from above, they still showed great ingratitude. Then look at [verse 3]. If some of the Jews did not believe, how is it that some say that the oracles were believed in? So what does Paul mean? He means that God entrusted the oracles to the Jews, not that the Jews entrusted themselves to the oracles, for the context does not make sense otherwise.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6

[AD 223] Callistus I of Rome on Romans 3:3

Of the Greek: but glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good."

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:3

The oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews, as we have said above, but some of them did not believe either God or his oracles. Those who did not believe were carnal, as Paul says elsewhere: “The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him.” But their faithlessness does not nullify the faithfulness of God. By God’s faithfulness we understand either the faith which God had when he entrusted his oracles to them or the faith by which those who received the oracles from God believed in him. We are therefore reminded that their faithlessness has not nullified the faithfulness of God, which he has shown to us.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 258] Cyprian on Romans 3:3

Nor ought it, my dearest brother, to disturb any one who is faithful and mindful of the Gospel, and retains the commands of the apostle who forewarns us; if in the last days certain persons, proud, contumacious, and enemies of God's priests, either depart from the Church or act against the Church, since both the Lord and His apostles have previously foretold that there should be such. Nor let any one wonder that the servant placed over them should be forsaken by some, when His own disciples forsook the Lord Himself, who performed such great and wonderful works, and illustrated the attributes of God the Father by the testimony of His doings. And yet He did not rebuke them when they went away, nor even severely threaten them; but rather, turning to His apostles, He said, "Will ye also go away? " manifestly observing the law whereby a man left to his own liberty, and established in his own choice, himself desires for himself either death or salvation. Nevertheless, Peter, upon whom by the same Lord the Church had been built, speaking one for all, and answering with the voice of the Church, says, "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life; and we believe, and are sure that Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God: " signifying, doubtless, and showing that those who departed from Christ perished by their own fault, yet that the Church which believes on Christ, and holds that which it has once learned, never departs from Him at all, and that those are the Church who remain in the house of God; but that, on the other hand, they are not the plantation planted by God the Father, whom we see not to be established with the stability of wheat, but blown about like chaff by the breath of the enemy scattering them, of whom John also in his epistle says, "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, no doubt they would have continued with us." Paul also warns us, when evil men perish out of the Church, not to be disturbed, nor to let our faith be lessened by the departure of the faithless. "For what," he says, "if some of them have departed from the faith? Hath their unbelief made the faith of God of none effect? God forbid! For God is true, but every man a liar."

Source: Epistle LIV

[AD 258] Cyprian on Romans 3:3

Yet although, in these last times, evangelic rigour has not so failed in the Church of God, nor the strength of Christian virtue or faith so languished, that there is not left a portion of the priests which in no respect gives way under these ruins of things and wrecks of faith; but, bold and stedfast, they maintain the honour of the divine majesty and the priestly dignity, with full observance of fear. We remember and keep in view that, although others succumbed and yielded, Mattathias boldly vindicated God's law; that Elias, when the Jews gave way and departed from the divine religion, stood and nobly contended; that Daniel, deterred neither by the loneliness of a foreign country nor by the harassment of continual persecution, frequently and gloriously suffered martyrdoms; also that the three youths, subdued neither by their tender years nor by threats, stood up faithfully against the Babylonian fires, and conquered the victor king even in their very captivity itself. Let the number either of prevaricators or of traitors see to it, who have now begun to rise in the Church against the Church, and to corrupt as well the faith as the truth. Among very many there still remains a sincere mind and a substantial religion, and a spirit devoted to nothing but the Lord and its God. Nor does the perfidy of others press down the Christian faith into ruin, but rather stimulates and exalts it to glory, according to what the blessed Apostle Paul exhorts, and says: "For what if some of these have fallen from their faith: hath their unbelief made the faith of God of none effect? God forbid. For God is true, but every man a liar." But if every man is a liar,and God only true, what else ought we, the servants, and especially the priests, of God, to do, than forsake human errors and lies, and continue in the truth of God, keeping the Lord's precepts?

Source: Epistle LXVII

[AD 258] Cyprian on Romans 3:3

You have written also, that on my account the Church has now a portion of herself in a state of dispersion, although the whole people of the Church are collected, and united, and joined to itself in an undivided concord: they alone have remained without, who even, if they had been within, would have had to be cast out. Nor does the Lord, the protector of His people, and their guardian, suffer the wheat to be snatched from His floor; but the chaff alone can be separated from the Church, since also the apostle says, "For what if some of them have departed from the faith? shall their unbelief make the faith of God of none effect? God forbid; for God is true, but every man a liar." And the Lord also in the Gospel, when disciples forsook Him as He spoke, turning to the twelve, said, "Will ye also go away? "then Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the word of eternal life; and we believe, and are sure, that Thou art the Son of the living God." Peter speaks there, on whom the Church was to be built, teaching and showing in the name of the Church, that although a rebellious and arrogant multitude of those who will not hear and obey may depart, yet the Church does not depart from Christ; and they are the Church who are a people united to the priest, and the flock which adheres to its pastor. Whence you ought to know that the bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the bishop; and if any one be not with the bishop, that he is not in the Church, and that those flatter themselves in vain who creep in, not having peace with God's priests, and think that they communicate secretly with some; while the Church, which is Catholic and one, is not cut nor divided, but is indeed connected and bound together by the cement of priests who cohere with one another.

Source: Epistle LXVIII

[AD 258] Cyprian on Romans 3:3

For the Lord chose Judas also among the apostles, and yet afterwards Judas betrayed the Lord. Yet not on that account did the faith and firmness of the apostles fail, because the traitor Judas failed from their fellowship: so also in the case in question the holiness and dignity of confessors is not forthwith diminished, because the faith of some of them is broken. The blessed Apostle Paul in his epistle speaks in this manner: "For what if some of them fall away from the faith, shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: for God is true, though every man be a liar." The greater and better part of the confessors stand firm in the strength of their faith, and in the truth of the law and discipline of the Lord; neither do they depart from the peace of the Church, who remember that they have obtained grace in the Church by the condescension of God; and by this very thing they obtain a higher praise of their faith, that they have separated from the faithlessness of those who have been associated with them in the fellowship of confession, and withdrawn from the contagion of crime. Illuminated by the true light of the Gospel, shone upon with the Lord's pure and white brightness, they are as praiseworthy in maintaining the peace of Christ, as they have been victorious in their combat with the devil.

Source: Treatise I. On the Unity of the Church.

[AD 258] Cyprian on Romans 3:3

Paulus of Obba said: It does not disturb me if any man does not assert the faith and truth of the Church, since the apostle says, "For what if some of them have fallen away from the faith? Has their unbelief made the faith of God of no effect? By no means. For God is true, but every man a liar." But if God is true, how can the truth of baptism be among the heretics, among whom God is not?

Source: The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian

[AD 382] Apollinaris of Laodicea on Romans 3:3

Let it be agreed, Paul says, that God is faithful and true in every case, whereas men have been judged as unfaithful and untrue, so that God by his goodness may conquer the self-righteousness of men by bestowing his own righteousness upon them.

Source: PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:3

Paul says this because it was not foreordained that believing Jews would not be thought worthy of receiving what God had promised just because the others were unbelieving, for the promise was such that the gift of grace would be given to those who believed.Therefore God is not put out because of the unbelief of the Jews and will grant eternal life to their believers, which he promised would be given to those who believed in Christ. Those who did not believe excluded themselves from consideration without doing the rest any injury. Having said this, Paul commends Jewish believers, because it was not their fault that many of their kinsmen refused to believe.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:3

And what comes next makes the same point clear. For he again adds and follows; "Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?"

Source: Homily 6 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:3

The unbelief of the Jews does not reflect badly on God but rather shows his honor and love of man to be all the greater, in that God is seen to have bestowed honor on people who would dishonor him. Look how he has revealed them to be guilty of misdeeds because of what they gloried in. The honor God showed to them was so great that even when he saw what the result of it would be, he did not withhold his good will toward them. But the Jews made the honors bestowed on them a means of insulting him who honored them.Paul said: “What if some of them did not believe?” Wasn’t it clear that it was all of them who did not believe? If Paul had told the truth directly he might have appeared to be a severe and hostile accuser.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:3

The faithfulness meant here is that to the promises made to Abraham, to whom it was said that “in your seed all the nations will be blessed.”

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Romans 3:3

God knew in advance who would obey the law and who would break it. Therefore those who did not believe were unable to stand in the way of his blessings.

Source: INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:4

If one is to be righteous, one must keep the law in every particular, which is almost impossible for human nature to achieve. Therefore every one is a liar. For since every man is a liar, it follows that on that day when the Lord comes to judgment with men, only he will be justified in what he says. For his words are true in everything, because they are the words of truth.It should also be understood that this saying, i.e., that every man is a liar, is taken from Psalm 116:11 … Now someone might object that if all men are liars, then Paul too, being a man, will also be a liar! But in that case David, who originally said it, would also be a liar, and what he said would be false, just because he was a liar.… The whole statement would thus become nonsense, which is absurd!

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 258] Cyprian on Romans 3:4

If every man is a liar and God alone is true, what else ought we servants and bishops of God to do except to reject human errors and lies and to remain in the truth of God, obeying the precepts of the Lord?

Source: Epistle LXVII.8

[AD 360] Eusebius of Emesa on Romans 3:4

Even if all men loved a lie before the coming of the truth, the true God nevertheless remained just, holding fast to the things which were proper to God and fulfilling everything which was said that was fitting.

Source: PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:4

Because God is true, he gives what he has promised. To fail is human, for the times and the foolishness of nature make man unstable in that he does not have foreknowledge. But God, for whom there is no future, remains unchanging, as he says: “I the Lord do not change.” Therefore Paul says that all men are liars, and this is true. For nature is fallible and is not unreasonably called a liar. It may be a liar intentionally or accidentally, but we must not expect God to be like that, for he is perfect and full of good will and will accomplish what he has promised. He even confirms this by the prophetic oracle: “Thou art justified in thy sentence and blameless in thy judgment.”

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 397] Ambrose of Milan on Romans 3:4

Does God tell a lie? He does not. It is impossible for God to tell a lie. Is this an impossibility because of some weakness? Certainly not! How could he be the cause of all things if there were something which he could not cause? What then is impossible to him? Nothing that is difficult for his power but only that which is contrary to his nature. It is impossible, it is said, for him to tell a lie. The impossibility comes not from weakness but from his power and greatness, for truth admits of no lie.

Source: LETTER 14

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:4

And I would have you here also note his judgment. For again he does not bring in his accusation of them on his own part, but as it were by way of objection, as if he said, But perhaps you will say, 'What then is the use of this circumcision since they used it not as was fitting, since they were trusted with the Law and were unfaithful to the trust?' And hitherto he is not a severe accuser, but as if to clear God of complaints against Him, he by this means turns the whole of the accusation round upon themselves. For why, he would say, do you complain that they did not believe? And how does this affect God? For as for His benefit, does the ingratitude of those benefited overturn it? Or does it make the honor to be no honor? For this is what the words, "Shall their unfaithfulness make the faith of God without effect," amount to. "God forbid." As if one should say, I have honored such an one. And if he did not receive the honor, this gives no ground for accusing me, nor impairs my kindness, but shows his want of feeling. But Paul does not say this merely, but what is much more. That not only does their unbelief not leave the soil of complaint upon God, but even shows His honor and love of man to be the greater, in that He is seen to have bestowed honor upon one who would dishonor Him. See how he has brought them out guilty of misdemeanors by means of what they gloried in; forasmuch as the honor with which God treated them was so great, that even when He saw what would come thereof, He withheld not His good-will toward them! Yet they made the honors bestowed on them a means of insulting Him that Honor them! Next, since he said, "For what if some did not believe?" (while clearly it was all of them that did not believe,) lest by speaking here too as the history allowed him, he should seem to be a severe accuser of them like an enemy, he puts that, which really took place, in the method of reasoning and syllogism, saying as follows: "Yea, let God be true, but every man a liar." What he says is something of this sort. I do not mean, he says, that some did not believe, but if you will, suppose that all were unbelieving, so waiving what really happened, to fall in with the objector, that he might seem overbearing or to be suspected. Well, he says, in this way God is the more justified. What does the word justified mean? That, if there could be a trial and an examination of the things He had done for the Jews, and of what had been done on their part towards Him, the victory would be with God, and all the right on His side. And after showing this clearly from what was said before, he next introduces the Prophet also as giving his approval to these things, and saying, "that You might be justified in Your sayings, and clear when You are judged." [Psalm 51:4] He then for His part did everything, but they were nothing the better even for this. Then he brings forward after this another objection that arises, and says [Romans 3:5-6]

Source: Homily 6 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:4

Paul is saying something like this: “Even if every one of the Jews was an unbeliever … God would only be the more justified.” What does the word justified mean? It means that if there were a trial and an examination of the things which God had done for the Jews and also of what they had done to him, the victory would be with God, and all the right would be on his side.

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:4

“Every man” means the majority. Paul’s opponents had quoted this text as if David had meant: “For this reason have I sinned, that thou might appear just in judging me.” But the true meaning is that God promised to punish sinners without showing favoritism and that some thought his delay in doing so amounted to a lie. God prevails when he judges the deeds of those from whom no one thought vengeance would ever be exacted. Or it may also mean that God has shown that he is concerned about mankind … and that he has overthrown those who wrongly suggest that he is not interested in human affairs.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 420] Jerome on Romans 3:4

If everyone who utters a lie has already destroyed his soul, and all of us are liars, are we all going to perish? What Scripture says … we should interpret as referring to heretics.… The doer of the deed has indeed killed his own soul, but the heretic—the liar—has killed as many souls as he has seduced.

Source: HOMILIES ON THE PSALMS 2

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Romans 3:4

God in himself is true; you in yourself are a liar—in him you can be true!

Source: HOMILIES ON JOHN 1.6

[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Romans 3:4

Human beings are thus given over to their own free will. Hence they are divided into two groups: those who prefer the worship of God and those who take the opposite path and come to a dire end, corresponding to their choice.

Source: INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Romans 3:5

"But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous, who taketh vengeance? God forbid."

Source: Clement of Alexandria The Instructor Book I

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:5

Paul says that it is wrong to say that God is unjust for bringing wrath on men. For how will the one who judges the world be thought to be unjust, when his very title of Judge shows that he does nothing without judgment? And where there is judgment, it follows that there will be justice. For the words judge and judgment are both derived from justice.The idea being expressed here does not accord with God or with the wisdom of God, but with man and with what has just been said, viz.: “All men are liars.”
But it is perfectly logical and right to say that justice is the enemy of unrighteousness, just as life is the enemy of death and light is the enemy of darkness. Therefore God, in whom is justice, is said to bring wrath on men, in whom unrighteousness dwells. For justice and unrighteousness are natural enemies. So how could God be regarded as unjust, simply because he is fighting unrighteousness?

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:5

David had sinned in the case of Uriah the Hittite. Because he knew that the promise would not be given to sinners, he pleaded that the righteousness of the words of God might overrule the judgment which said that the promise should not be given to sinners and that it might sanctify the penitent in order to give him what God had promised he would give to the righteous. To this Paul adds that … if God is justified because we are sinners, it would be wrong of him to pardon us on that account. If it can really be said that our wickedness is of some advantage to God, then there is some measure of truth in this reasoning. But it is dangerous to speak like that. God is not unjust if he judges, because our unrighteousness is of no benefit to him. It is not as if he would somehow be justified by our sins or as if he would somehow rejoice at our sins, by which he alone would then appear to be righteous.This way of thinking suits men but not God, because it does not happen that God should ever be unjust, only man. Nor does our unrighteousness make God righteous if he gives to us sinners what he promised to the saints, for although we are sinners, we are reformed by repentance so that it is not as sinners but as those who have been cleansed that we are readied to receive the promise.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:5

What does Paul mean? God honored the Jews, but they dishonored him. This gives God the victory and shows the greatness of his love toward man, in that he continued to honor them in spite of what they were like.But if this is true of us (someone might say), why am I to be punished when I have contributed to God’s victory by dishonoring him? Paul answers this by a corresponding absurdity. In effect, he says that if this man were the cause of God’s victory and he was punished as a result, it was an injustice. But if God is not unjust and the man was punished, then he could not have been the cause of God’s victory.… For God’s justice far exceeds what we think of as justice and is based on other ineffable criteria.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:5-6

He solves one perplexity by another again. Yet as this is not clear, we must needs declare it more clearly. What is it then he means? God honored the Jews: they did despite to Him. This gives Him the victory, and shows the greatness of His love towards man, in that He honored them even such as they were. Since then, he means, we did despite to Him and wronged Him, God by this very thing became victorious, and His righteousness was shown to be clear. Why then (a man may say) am I to be punished, who have been the cause of His victory by the despite I did Him? Now how does he meet this? It is, as I was saying, by another absurdity again. For if it were you, he says, that were the cause of the victory, and after this are punished, the thing is an act of injustice. But if He is not unjust, and yet you are punished, then you are no more the cause of the victory. And note his apostolic reverence; (or caution: εὐλάβεια]); for after saying, "Is God unrighteous Who takes vengeance?" he adds, "I speak as a man." As if, he means, any body were to argue in the way men reason. For what things seem with us to be justice, these the just judgment of God far exceeds, and has certain other unspeakable grounds for it. Next, since it was indistinct, he says the same thing over again [Romans 3:7]

Source: Homily 6 on Romans

[AD 542] Caesarius of Arles on Romans 3:5

When adversities come … or when by God’s just judgment hostility, dryness or death is imposed, we should attribute this to our sins rather than to God’s injustice.

Source: SERMON 70.1

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:6

In this passage the word world means the people who are in this world, just as we read elsewhere that “the whole world is in the power of the evil one.”

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:6

It is true that it would not have been just if God had judged the world if its sins were of some benefit to him, so that whenever sinners received forgiveness at his nod, God would appear to be good. Then if they had not sinned, according to this reasoning, he would not appear to be righteous. For if they had not sinned there would be nothing to forgive, and God would not be good. But this kind of thinking is absurd!

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:7

There are many kinds of religion in this world, many schools of philosophy, and many teachings which promote false assertions and are backed up with lying arguments. Those who invent them have a false reputation for wisdom—people of little or no authority. We should recognize them for what they are. Because of them many false statements are commonly accepted as true. The whole world, including religion, is now burdened with lying opinions. Even the elect are being led astray, if you can imagine that. The truth of God is now attacking and refuting every lie. Faith in God’s truth, God’s wisdom and God’s Word is undercutting all claims of false teaching. By each of these lies which had previously been asserted by men, the truth of God is abounding, by demonstrating their superficiality and by communicating the simple truth of faith in each and every case. In this way, says the apostle, the truth of God abounds through the falsehood of men.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:7

For if God, he means is shown to be a Lover of man, and righteous, and good, by your acts of disobedience, you ought not only to be exempt from punishment but even to have good done unto you. But if so, that absurdity will be found to result, which is in circulation with so many, that good comes of evil, and that evil is the cause of good; and one of the two is necessary, either that He be clearly unjust in punishing, or that if He punish not, it is from our vices that He has the victory. And both of these are absurd to a degree. And himself meaning to show this too, he introduces the Greeks (i.e. heathens) as the fathers of these opinions, thinking it enough to allege against what he has mentioned the character of the persons who say these things. For then they used to say in ridicule of us, "let us do evil that good may come." And this is why he has stated it clearly in the following language.

Source: Homily 6 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:7

The logic of this argument can easily tend toward the absurdity that good comes out of evil and that evil is the cause of good. In that case, one of two options follows: Either God is clearly unjust in punishing, or if he does not punish, then he gets his victory from our vices. Either of these conclusions is absurd.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 6

[AD 202] Irenaeus on Romans 3:8

And, to conceal their impious doctrines, they abuse the name

[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Romans 3:8

These people twist the Scriptures when they read them by their tone of voice, in order to serve their own preferences. They alter some of the accents and punctuation marks in order to force wise and constructive precepts to support their taste for luxury.

Source: STROMATA 3.39.2

[AD 258] Cyprian on Romans 3:8

That the catechumen ought now no longer to sin. In the Epistle of Paul to the Romans: "Let us do evil until the good things come; whose condemnation is just."

Source: Treatise XII Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:8

This is why the apostle asked himself this question. The matter was raised by opponents, as if this were the meaning of the preaching of the forgiveness of sins—that they should do evil and good would come of it. That is, they should sin so that by forgiving their sins God should appear to be good, according to what has just been said above. Paul calls this blasphemy and rejects it as a bad interpretation of God’s teaching. Faith is not meant to encourage people to sin by preaching that God will ultimately be vindicated. Rather, it gives sinners a remedy so that having recovered their health they may live under the law of God and not sin again.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:8

For whereas Paul said, "where sin abounded grace did much more abound" [Romans 5:20], in ridicule of him and perverting what he said to another meaning, they said, We must cling to vice that we may get what is good. But Paul said not so; however to correct this notion it is that he says, "What then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid!" (ib. 6:1, 2.) For I said it, he means, of the times which are past, not that we should make this a practice. To lead them away then from this suspicion, he said, that henceforth this was even impossible. For "how shall we," he says, "that are dead unto sin, live any longer therein?" Against the Greeks then he inveighs (κατέδραμεν) without difficulty. For their life was exceeding abandoned. But of the Jews, even if their life seemed to have been careless, still they had great means of cloaking these things in the Law and circumcision, and the fact of God having conversed with them, and their being the teachers of all. And this is why he strips them even of these, and shows that for these they were the more punished, and this is the conclusion to which he has here drawn his discussion. For if they be not punished, he would say, for so doing, that blasphemous language — let us do evil that good may come — must necessarily gain currency. But if this be impious, and they who hold this language shall be punished (for this he declared by saying, "whose damnation is just"), it is plain that they are punished. For if they who speak it be deserving of vengeance, much more are they who act it, but if deserving thereof, it is as having done sin. For it is not man that punishes them, that any one should suspect the sentence, but God, that does all things righteously. But if they are righteously punished, it is unrighteously that they, who make ridicule of us, said what they did. For God did and does everything, that our conversation might shine forth and be upright on every side.

Let us then not be listless; for so we shall be able to recover the Greeks also from their error. But when we are in words lovers of wisdom, but in deeds behave unseemly, with what looks shall we face them? With what lips shall we discourse concerning doctrines? For he will say to each of us, How can you that have failed in what is less, claim to teach me about what is greater? You who as yet have not learned that covetousness is a vice, how can you be wise upon the things in heaven? But do you know that it is a vice? Then, the charge is the greater, because you transgress knowingly. And why speak I of the Greek, for even our laws allow us not to speak thus boldly when our life has become abandoned. For to "the sinner," it says, "says God, what have you to do to declare my statutes?" [Psalm 50:16] There was a time when the Jews were carried away captive, and when the Persians were urgent with them, and called upon them to sing those divine songs unto them, they said, "How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?" [Psalm 137:4] Now if it were un lawful to sing the oracles of God in a strange land, much less might the estranged soul do it. For estranged the merciless soul is. If the Law made those who were captives and had become slaves to men in a strange land, to sit in silence; much more is it right for those who are slaves to sin and are in an alien community (πολιτεί& 139·) to have a curb upon their mouths. And however they had their instruments then. For it says, "Upon the willows in the midst thereof did we hang our instruments," but still they might not sing. And so we also, though we have a mouth and tongue, which are instruments of speech, have no right to speak boldly, so long as we be slaves to what is more tyrannical than any barbarian, sin. For tell me what have you to say to the Greek, if you plunder, and be covetous? will you say, Forsake idolatry, acknowledge God, and draw not near to gold and silver? Will he not then make a jest of you, and say, Talk to yourself first in this way? For it is not the same thing for a Gentile to practise idolatry, and a Christian to commit this same (4 manuscripts. om. "same") sin. For how are we to draw others away from that idolatry if we draw not ourselves away from this? For we are nearer related to ourselves than our neighbor is, and so when we persuade not ourselves, how are we to persuade others? For if he that does not rule well over his own house, will not take care of the Church either [1 Timothy 3:5], how shall he that does not rule even over his own soul be able to set others right? Now do not tell me, that you do not worship an image of gold, but make this clear to me, that you do not do those things which gold bids you. For there be different kinds of idolatry, and one holds mammon lord, and another his belly his god, and a third some other most baneful lust. But, "you do not sacrifice oxen to them as the Gentiles do." Nay, but what is far worse, you butcher your own soul. But "you do not bow the knee and worship." Nay, but with greater obedience you do all that they command you, whether it be your belly, or money, or the tyranny of lust. For this is just what makes Gentiles disgusting, that they made gods of our passions; calling lust Venus, and anger Mars, and drunkenness Bacchus. If then you do not grave images as did they, yet do you with great eagerness bow under the very same passions, when you make the members of Christ members of an harlot, and plunge yourself into the other deeds of iniquity. [1 Corinthians 6:15] I therefore exhort you to lay to heart the exceeding unseemliness hereof, and to flee from idolatry:— for so does Paul name covetousness— and to flee not only covetousness in money, but that in evil desire, and that in clothing, and that in food, and that in everything else: since the punishment we shall have to suffer if we obey not God's laws is much severer. For, He says, "the servant that knew his Lord's will," and did it not, "shall be beaten with many stripes." [Luke 12:47] With a view then to escaping from this punishment, and being useful both to others and to ourselves, let us drive out all iniquity from our soul and choose virtue. For so shall we attain to the blessings which are to come, whereto may it be granted us all to attain by the grace and love toward man, etc.

Source: Homily 6 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:8

The people Paul is referring to here are Gentiles who thought in this way themselves.

[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Romans 3:8

This was not the intention of the apostles’ teaching. On the contrary, they demanded that everyone abstain from all manner of wickedness.

Source: INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:9

Here it must be understood that the reference is to all men, whether they are under the written law [of Moses] or the natural law. For we understand that this applies to the Gentiles in the same way as we have already said above. When they begin to do the works of the law by nature and become a law for themselves, then they are reproached by their conscience for the things they do which are contrary to that law. For this reason it seems to me that those who have thought that the law of nature is the law of God and that the law of Moses is merely the written law are correct. If Paul was speaking of the written law, the law of Moses, when he said: “Sin is not imputed when there is no law,” neither Cain nor those who perished in the flood4 nor those who were burnt with fire at Sodom would have had their sins imputed to them. But since we see that not only did they have their sins imputed to them, they also suffered retribution for them, it is clear that Paul was speaking here of the natural law, which with the exception of the early years of childhood, is present in all men. For this reason he was quite right to say that all are under the power of sin. Whence it seems to me that the philosophers were right when they said that every mortal being on coming to the age of discretion, when by the entry of the natural law it might distinguish between good and evil, first of all discovers what is evil and afterward combats it by means of instructions, precepts and warnings, so as to move on to virtue. I think that Paul was agreeing with them when he said: “But when the commandment came, sin sprang to life.” … It must not be thought that everyone is guilty of all the sins which are listed below. Rather, some are guilty of some of them, and others are guilty of others but in such a way that taken together the whole range of sinfulness is found in the human race.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:9

Paul is saying: “Why go on talking like this? For we have shown by the examples given that all, Jews and Gentiles alike, are guilty and that the law is being pursued in vain.” For Paul first showed that the Gentiles are guilty according to the law of nature and also because they did not accept the law of Moses, for which reason their case is very dire indeed. Then he showed that the Jews were also guilty. While they appeared to be living under God’s law and defended their privilege by the merit of their ancestors, they in fact brought the grace of God into disrepute because they rejected the promise made to their ancestors.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:9-18

"What then have we more than they? For we have proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin. As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: there is none that understands, there is none that seeks after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that does good, no not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues have they used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips; whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes."

He had accused the Gentiles, he had accused the Jews; it came next in order to mention the righteousness which is by faith. For if the law of nature availed not, and the written Law was of no advantage, but both weighed down those that used them not aright, and made it plain that they were worthy of greater punishment, then after this the salvation which is by grace was necessary. Speak then of it, O Paul, and display it. But as yet he does not venture, as having an eye to the violence of the Jews, and so turns afresh to his accusation of them; and first he brings in as accuser, David speaking of the same things at length, which Isaiah mentioned all in short compass, so furnishing a strong curb for them, so that they might not bound off, nor any of his hearers, while the matters of faith were laid open to them, might after this start away; being beforehand safely held down by the accusations of the prophets. For there are three excesses which the prophet lays down; he says that all of them together did evil, and that they did not do good indifferently with evil, but that they followed after wickedness alone, and followed it also with all earnestness. And next that they should not say, "What then, if these things were said to others?" he goes on:

Source: Homily 7 on Romans

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:9

Paul finds no reason for saying that the Jews are better than others.… Both Jews and Gentiles are under sin—something we not only deduce by reason but also corroborate by the witness of the Jews themselves.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 1274] Thomas Aquinas on Romans 3:9

271. After showing the Jews’ advantage over the Gentiles so far as God’s blessings are concerned [n. 248], the Apostle now rejects their vainglory, by which they preferred themselves to Gentiles converted to the faith. First, he states his point; secondly, be proves it, there [v. 9b; n. 274] at For we have charged. 272. First, therefore, he says: I have asked what advantage has the Jew. The first is that God’s words were delivered to them. What then shall we Jews say to converts to 141 the faith? Are we Jews any better off than Gentiles converted to the faith? For this was a matter discussed among them: "A dispute also rose among them, which of them was to be regarded as the greatest" (Lk 23:24). He answers this when he says, No, not at all. 273. But this seems to be at variance with an earlier statement (v. 2), which said that their advantage was much in every way. The gloss [of Lombard, col. 1356] explains that in the first statement the Apostle was thinking of the Jews in the time of the Law, but now he is speaking of the time of grace because, as is written in Col (3:11): "In Christ there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised," since these make no difference so far as the state of grace is concerned. But this explanation does not seem to be altogether in keeping with the Apostle’s intention, because later he will show that even while they were under the Law, they were under the power of sin, just as the Gentiles were, and even more so: "This is Jerusalem; I have set her in the center of the nations, with countries round about her. And she has wickedly rebelled against my ordinances and become more wicked than these countries" (Ez 5:5). Hence, it seems that above he was showing the excellence of God’s blessings; consequently, he did not say that the Jew was more excellent, but that something greater had been conferred on the Jew. Here he is rejecting the notion that they are excellent persons, because in spite of receiving God’s blessings they did not use them properly. 274. Then when he says For we have charged (v. 9b) he establishes his points: first, that the Jews do not excel the Gentiles so far as the state of sin is concerned; 142 secondly, so far as the state of justice is concerned, there [v. 2; n. 299] at But now apart from the law. He establishes the first in two ways: first, from what has been stated above; secondly, from an authority, there [v. 10; n. 176] at As it is written. 275. First, therefore, he says: We have already charged, i.e., we have supported with reasons, that Jews and Greeks, i.e., Gentiles, are all under the power of sin: "From the sole of the foot even to the head there is no soundness in him" (Is 1:6). For he showed, first of all, that the Gentiles suppressed the truth they knew by their wickedness and unrighteousness; secondly, that the Jews, after receiving the Law, dishonored God by transgressing it. 276. Then when he says, As it is written, he establishes his point by the authority of the Psalmist: first, he quotes him; secondly, he explains, there [v. 19; n. 290] at Now we know. In regard to the first he does two things: first, he mentions sins of omission; secondly, sins of commission, there [v. 13; n. 282] at Their throat. He touches on the sins of omission in two ways: first, by removing the sources of good works; secondly, by removing the good works themselves, there [v. 12; n. 280] at All have turned aside. 143 277. Now there are three sources or principles that make a work good: one of these pertains to the righteousness of the work, namely, justice, which he says is lacking: no one is just: "The godly man has perished from the earth; and there is none upright among men" (Mic 7:2). No one is just can be interpreted in three ways: in one way as meaning that no one is just within himself and of himself, but of himself everyone is a sinner and it is owing to God that he is righteous: "The Lord, a God merciful and gracious, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty" (Ex 34:6). In another way it means that no one is just in every way but has some sin according to Pr (20:9): "Who can say, ‘I have made my heart clean’?" and Ec (7:20): "Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins." In a third way it can be understood as referring to the wicked members of a populace, among which no one is just. For it is the custom of Scripture sometimes to speak of an entire populace in terms of its evil members and sometimes of its good members as in Jer (26:8 ff) where it is stated that when Jeremiah finished saying everything the Lord had commanded him to say to the entire populace, the priests and prophets and the entire people took hold of him and said that he would die the death. Then it is added: "Then the princes and all the people said to the priests and prophets: ‘This man does not deserve the sentence of death.’" (Jer 26:16). However, the first two meanings seem to be more in keeping with the Apostle’s intent; and the same must be said for the following. 144 278. The second element that makes a work good is intellectual discernment, whose absence is declared when he says, no one understands: "They have neither knowledge nor understanding" (Ps 82:5); "He would not understand" (Ps 36:3). 279. The third element is a right intention, whose absence is described when he says, no one seeks after God, namely, by directing his intention toward Him: "It is time to seek the Lord that he may come and rain salvation upon you" (Hos 10:12). 280. Then he removes the good works themselves. First, he cites offenses against the divine Law when he says, all have turned aside, namely, from regulation by divine Law: "They have all turned to their own way" (Is 56:11). Secondly, failure to pursue the end; hence he adds, together they have become unprofitable. For we call unprofitable whatever does not attain its end. Therefore, when men turn from God for Whom they were made, they are rendered unprofitable: "The brood of the ungodly will be of no use" (Wis 4:3). Thirdly, he excludes the good works themselves, when he adds, no one does good: "They are skilled in doing evil, but how to do good they know not" (Jer 4:22). 281. He adds, not even one. This can be taken exclusively, to mean: except the one who alone did good by redeeming the human race: "One man among a thousand I found, but a woman among all these I have not found" (Ec 7:28). Or it can be taken inclusively, to mean: there is not even one pure man doing good, i.e., what is perfect: "Search the squares [of Jerusalem] to see if you can find a man, one who does justice and seeks truth" (Jer 5:1). 282. Then when he says Their throats (v. 13) he mentions the sins of commission: 145 first, sins of speech; secondly, sinful deeds, there [v. 15; n. 287] at their feet are swift. The sins of the heart can be gathered from these. 283. In regard to sins of speech he mentions four things. First, readiness and foulness, when he says: their throat is an open grave. For an open grave has two features. For it is ready to receive the dead. According to this, a man’s throat is said to be an open grave, when it is prepared to utter deadly remarks in the manner described by Jer (5:16): "Their quiver is like an open tomb." Secondly, it exudes a foul odor: "You are like white-washed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within they are full of dead men’s bones and all uncleanness" (Mt 23:27). Therefore, a person from whose mouth proceeds the foul odor of filthy remarks has a throat which is an open grave: "Fire and smoke and sulphur issued from their mouths" (Rev 19:17). 284. Secondly, in regard to sins of speech, he touches on deception when he says, they use their tongues to deceive, having one thing in their heart and another in their words: "Their tongues is a deadly arrow; it speaks deceitfully" (Jer 9:8). 285. Thirdly, he mentions the havoc wrought by their words, when he says: The venom of asps is under their lips, because they utter words which kill their neighbor either spiritually or bodily: "Their wine is the poison of serpents and the cruel venom of asps" (Dt 32:33). 286. Fourthly, he designates the abundance of these sins when he says: Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness, because they have a plentiful supply of curses, for 146 they curse in slandering others, contrary to what he says below (12:14): "Bless and do not curse them". And bitterness, inasmuch as they do not hesitate to say insulting words to their neighbor’s face, being provoked by bitterness, contrary to what is written in Eph (4:31): "Let all bitterness be put away from you." 287. Then when he says their feet are swift (v.15) he touches on sinful deeds, in regard to which he mentions three things. First, readiness to do wickedly. Hence he says, Their feet are swift, i.e., their feelings, to shed blood, i.e., to commit any serious sin, because among the sins committed against our neighbor, murder is the most grievous: "Their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed blood" (Pr 1:16). 288. Secondly, he touches on the number of injuries they inflict on others when he adds: in their paths, i.e., in their deeds, are ruin; because they crush others by oppressing them: "It is in his mind to destroy" (Is 10:7); and misery, inasmuch as they deprive men of their goods and reduce them to wretchedness: "They send men away naked, taking away their clothes" (Jb 24:7). Yet these two, ruin and misery, can be taken as designating the punishment rather than the sin. Then the sense is: In their paths are ruin and misery, i.e., their deeds, which are signified as paths, lead them to misery. In this case, ruin would refer to the oppressive punishment they suffer for their sins: "They shall be broken as a potter’s vessel" (Is 30:14) and misery, to the punishment of damnation, because they will be refused eternal happiness: "They are miserable, with their hopes set on dead things" (Wis 14:10). 147 289. Thirdly, he shows their persistence in evil, from which men are returned in two ways. In one way by a desire to be at peace with others. Against this he says, the way of peace they have not known, i.e., have not accepted: "Among those who hate peace I was peaceful" (Ps 120:6). In another way by the fear of God; but they neither fear God nor regard man (Lk 18:2). Hence he adds, there is no fear of God before their eyes, i.e., in their plans: "The fear of the Lord casts out sin; for without fear a person cannot be justified" (Si 1:27). This could also refer in a particular way to the Jews who did not believe Christ, i.e., that they have not known the way of peace, name1y, Christ, of Whom it is written: "He is our peace" (Eph 2:14). 290. Then when he says Now we know (v. 19) he explains the text he quoted in three ways: first, by expounding its sense; secondly, its intention, there [v. l9b; n. 294] at that every mouth; thirdly, he gives the reason for his words, there [v. 20; n. 295] at For by the works of the law. 291. It should be noted that the Jews, against whom the Apostle was speaking, could, to excuse themselves, pervert the sense of the text he cited and claim that it referred to the Gentiles, not to the Jews. But the Apostle rejects this, saying: Now we know that whatever the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law, i.e., to whom the Law is given and who profess 148 the Law: "When Moses commanded us a law" (Dt 33:4). But the Gentiles were not under the law; accordingly, the above words pertain to the Jews. 292. Two objections are raised here. The first is that the above words were not taken from the Law but from a psalm. The answer is that the word "Law" is sometimes taken for the entire Old Testament, not for the five books of Moses alone, as in Jn (15:25): "It is to fulfill the word that is written in their law, ‘They hated me without cause,’" which was written in the Old Testament, not in the five books of Moses. This is the way, "Law" is taken here. Again, the Old Testament is sometimes divided into three parts, namely, the Law, the psalms and the prophets, as in Lk (24:44): "That everything written about me in the law of Moses and the prophets and the psalms must be fulfilled." Finally, the entire Old Testament is sometimes divided into two, namely, the Law and the prophets, as in Mt (22:40): "On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets." In this sense the Psalter is included under the prophets. 293. The second objection is that in the Law, i.e., in the Old Testament, many things are said that pertain to other nations, as is clear in many passages of Isaiah and Jeremiah, where many statements are directed against Babylon and other nations. Therefore, not everything that the Law says speaks to those and about those who are under the Law. The answer is that whatever it says indeterminately seems to be directed to those to whom the Law has been given; but when the Scripture speaks of others it mentions them by name, as when it is written: "The burden of Babylon," "The burden of Tyre," etc. Furthermore, whatever was said against other nations in the Old Testament was 149 somehow directed to the Jews, inasmuch as ill fortune was foretold for their consolation or fear, just as any preacher should say what pertains to his audience, not what pertains to others: "Declare to my people their transgressions" (Is 58:1), as if to say: "not others’ transgressions." 294. Then when he says that every mouth (v. 19b) he states the intent of the text cited, for Sacred Scripture accuses all of injustice for two reasons. First, to suppress their boasting, by which they considered themselves just, as in Lk (18:12): "I fast twice a week." In regard to this he says, that every mouth may be stopped, which presumptuously ascribes justice to itself: "For the mouths of liars will be stopped" (Ps 63:11); "Talk no more so very proudly" (1 Sam 2:3). Secondly, so that recognizing their guilt, they might subject themselves to God as the sick to a physician. Hence he continues: and the whole world may be held accountable [made subject] to God, i.e., not only the Gentiles but the Jews also, after recognizing their guilt: "Shall not my soul be subject to God?" (Ps 62:1). 295. Then when he says For by the works of the law (v. 20) he assigns the reason for these words: first, he assigns the reason; secondly, he explains it, there [v. 20b; n. 298] at Since through the law. 296. First, therefore, he says: The reason no one is just is that no human being will be justified in his sight, i.e., according to His judgment, by works of the law; because, as is stated in Gal (2:2l): "If justification were through the law, then Christ died to no purpose," and in *** (3:5): "Not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy he saved us." 150 297. However, a work of the Law is of two kinds: one is peculiar to the Mosaic Law, as the observance of ceremonial precepts; the other is a work of the Law of nature, because it pertains to the natural law, as "Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal," etc. Now some take the Apostle’s words as referring to the first works, namely, that the ceremonials did not confer the grace through which men are made just. But this does not seem to be the Apostle’s intent, for he immediately adds: "since through the law comes knowledge of sin." But it is clear that sins are made known through prohibitions contained in the moral precepts. Consequently, the Apostle intends to say that by no works of the Law, even those commanded by the moral precepts, is man justified in the sense that justice would be caused in him by works, because, as he states below (11:6): "But if it is by grace it is no longer on the basis of works." 298. Then when he says, since through the law, he proves his statement, namely, that the works of the Law do not justify. For the Law is given that man might know what to do and what to avoid: "He has not dealt thus with any other nation; they do not know his ordinances" (Ps 147:20); "The commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light and the way of life" (Pr 6:23). But from the fact that man knows a sin he should avoid as being forbidden, it does not at once follow that he avoids it (because this pertains to the nature of righteousness), because concupiscence subverts the judgment of reason, when it bears on a particular moral action as performable. Consequently, the Law is not enough to make one just; another remedy is needed to suppress concupiscence.

[AD 165] Justin Martyr on Romans 3:10

With their tongues they have practised deceit, their throat is an open sepulchre, the poison of asps is under their lips, destruction and misery are in their paths, and the way of peace they have not known.'

Source: Dialogue of Justin

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:10

It may appear that there are other scriptural passages which seem to contradict this one by suggesting that some people were righteous, e.g., when it is said of Sodom in relation to Jerusalem: “Sodom is righteous compared with you.” But note carefully what Scripture actually says. It does not say that Sodom was righteous but that since Jerusalem had committed so many sins and what it was doing was so awful, Sodom appeared to be righteous by comparison.… For this reason, I am afraid that when I look at those of us who are in the church of God and who claim to follow his law and the commands of the gospel, there are not a few unbelievers who appear to be righteous by comparison.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:10

That no one has done good, not even one, is a hard saying and difficult to understand. How is it possible that no one, Jew or Greek, has ever done anything good? Are we supposed to believe that nobody has ever shown hospitality, fed the hungry, clothed the naked, delivered the innocent from the hands of the powerful or done anything similar? It does not seem possible to me that Paul was intending to assert anything as incredible as that. I think that what he meant must be understood as follows. If someone lays the foundation for a house and puts up one or two walls or transports some building materials to the site, can he be said to have built the house, just because he has set to work on it? The man who will be said to have built the house is the one who has finished off each and every part of it. So I think that here the apostle is saying that no one has done good in the sense that no one has brought goodness to perfection and completion. If we ask ourselves who is truly good and who has done good perfectly, we shall find only him who said: “I am the good shepherd,” and again: “The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.”

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:10

From unrighteousness Paul goes on to list their evil deeds and even adds some worse ones, in order to show that there was no hope for them unless they cried out for the mercy of Christ, who forgives sins.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:10

The psalm from which this quote is taken speaks of the fool. Paul shows that witness to the fool will be fulfilled particularly at the coming of Christ. When he appears, not one righteous person will be found.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 500] Desert Fathers on Romans 3:10

Pambo said to Antony, ‘What shall I do?’ Antony said, ‘Do not trust in your own righteousness. Do not go on sorrowing over a deed that is past. Keep your tongue and your belly under control.’

Source: The Desert Fathers, Sayings of the Early Christian Monks

[AD 202] Irenaeus on Romans 3:11

And, "There is none that understandeth, or that seeketh after God: they have all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable"

Source: Against Heresies Book I

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:11

Even the apostle Paul himself says that he knows in part and understands in part. So who is there who can make a claim that he understands? For however much he may understand, it will appear that he understands through a glass darkly and that only after he lays aside this earthly body will he see face to face. … Thus it is that “no one understands, no one seeks for God.” For as long as we are preoccupied with the cares of the body and seek the things of the body, we cannot seek God nor can we think his thoughts.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:11

Seek God. Do not be like Asa the king of Judah, who after receiving many blessings from God fell so far that when he suffered lameness in his feet he would not seek God even though there was a prophet present.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:11

One who does not understand does not seek. Or perhaps it is that one does not understand because one does not seek. One seeks for God by enquiring after his will.… The sinner has not known the will of his master. “Know me, know my will,” as the popular saying goes.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:12

No one doubts that those who do not look to God for help are inclined to seek help from vain things, and vanity is an idol. Thus they become useless. Once that happens they cannot do good either, for those who have already fallen just go from bad to worse.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 428] Theodore of Mopsuestia on Romans 3:12

Paul did not treat this passage as if it were prophetic but rather because what David said about transgressors was still a good summary of what was going on in Paul’s day. Even now we still cite texts of this kind in our sermons, because what they say can be applied to our congregations.

Source: PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

[AD 220] Tertullian on Romans 3:13

Anger has been prohibited, our spirits retained, the petulance of the hand checked, the poison of the tongue extracted.

Source: Of Patience

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:13

This comes from Psalm 5[:10]. It seems to me that Paul is using this text to describe different types of human sin. The analogy: Every grave contains the uncleanness of the dead body inside. This is why our Lord said in the Gospel that the scribes and Pharisees were whited sepulchres. On the outside they appear to be beautiful, but on the inside they are full of all sorts of uncleanness. But in this passage Paul seems to be revealing something more than this about the sins of those whom he is talking about, because he says that they are an “open” grave, not one which is shut and covered up. Those who were called a closed sepulchre had enough sense of shame not to reveal their sins to the public. But these people are called an open grave because they have their uncleanness and impurity on display, and they are so accustomed to evil that … whenever they open their mouth, instead of speaking the Word of God, the word of life, they open their throat and speak the word of death, the word of the devil, not from the heart but from the grave. Whenever you see a man cursing and swearing, you may be sure that he is one of this type.“They use their tongues to deceive.” “To deceive” means to say one thing and think another. I am not certain that even the justified and the elect are entirely free of this sin. Some commit it more and others less. The only one who is perfect in this respect is the one of whom it is written: “He had committed no sin, and there was no deceit in his mouth.” There may be someone who is careful and cautious enough to avoid major failings in this respect, but who is there who does not fall into this trap either from a sense of shame or from neglect? Occasionally things which should be done are overlooked because of forgetfulness, and in order for no blame to appear they are excused in a way which does not correspond to the facts. This is why Peter, realizing that these are all different types of deception, wrote this in his epistle: “Put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander. Like newborn babes, long for pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up to salvation.”35
The bite of the serpent kills the body with its poison. Even a bite of a poisonous word may kill the soul by deception. This may be applied both to those who surround others with slanderous remarks and of those who, by heretical teaching tainted with the poison of the devil, deceive the souls of the simple.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 258] Cyprian on Romans 3:13

Hence the threatening countenance, the lowering aspect, pallor in the face, trembling on the lips, gnashing of the teeth, mad words, unbridled revilings, a hand prompt for the violence of slaughter; even if for the time deprived of a sword, yet armed with the hatred of an infuriate mind. And accordingly the Holy Spirit says in the Psalms: "Be not jealous against him who walketh prosperously in his way." And again: "The wicked shall observe the righteous, and shall gnash upon him with his teeth. But God shall laugh at him; for He seeth that his day is coming." The blessed Apostle Paul designates and points out these when he says, "The poison of asps is under their lips, and their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood, destruction and misery are in their ways, who have not known the way of peace; neither is the fear of God before their eyes."

Source: Treatise X On Jealousy and Envy

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:13

Already chained to evil, they wanted if possible to devour the good, so that just as a sepulchre is open to receive corpses, so their throat is open to devour the good.… The words of men are like tiny mice. They speak in order to deceive, and just as poison flows from the lips of a serpent, so trickery and deceit flow from their lips.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:13

The stench of their teaching and flattery contaminates and kills those who listen. This is why a grave is carefully sealed, so that it does not continue to breed disease among the living by its odor. They express one thing with their mouths but another with their hearts. The venom of asps is mentioned because it is supposed to be the most harmful.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 202] Irenaeus on Romans 3:14

To those, no doubt, who have received the grace of the "adoption, by which we cry, Abba Father."

Source: Against Heresies Book III

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:14

Paul did not say that their lips were full of the poison of asps. For although many may be involved in sins of that kind, there are not many who are totally given over to the harm which that poison can do. On the other hand, there are many whose mouths are full of curses and bitterness. For whose mouth is so pure that he never curses? I am not speaking now of those who deserve to be cursed but of those whom God has not cursed, i.e., the just and innocent. For this vice is so prevalent and so automatic a trait of human weakness, especially with respect to those who are under or inferior to us, that many people would not even think to call it cursing.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:14

It is clear and obvious that evil people are always throwing curses and bitterness at the good in an attempt to harm and distract them.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:14

There is not just one kind of malicious talk. What is said out of malice is without doubt said recklessly.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:15

This may seem to be an infrequent crime. But we take it to include not only those who shed blood by killing the body but also those who by some deception or other separate the soul from God.… For if the one who separates the body from the soul which gives it life is called a murderer, how much more truly will the one who separates the soul from the true life, which is God, be called a murderer?Feet in this passage refers to the way we live our life, as the prophet says: “My feet had almost stumbled.”

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 380] Apostolic Constitutions on Romans 3:15

Destruction and misery are in their ways, and the way of peace have they not known. The fear of God is not before their eyes.

Source: CONSTITUTIONS OF THE HOLY APOSTLES

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:15

Scripture says this about the murder of the prophets, whom they killed without hesitation—“slow to do good but swift to murder.”

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Romans 3:16

In the same way as Paul, prophecy upbraids the people with not understanding the law. "Destruction and misery are in their ways, and the way of peace have they not known."

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:16

Since they hastened to do evil, Paul called their path a ruinous and unhappy way.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:17

Christ is our peace. Therefore the way of peace is the way of Christ, which sinners do not know.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:17

Having chosen the way of hostility, along which they were heading toward the second death, they did not want to know about the way which leads to eternal life. This is called the way of peace, because with God as its guardian it will have no disturbance. Those who will the good have this rest with God.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Romans 3:18

"There is no fear of God before their eyes."

Source: Clement of Alexandria Stromata Book I

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:18

If someone is always thinking of what will please or displease God, then it can be said that the fear of God is always before his eyes. But such a person must be experienced and diligently instructed in the law of God so as not to be afraid when there is no reason to fear. For the fear of God must always be placed before our eyes: not the eyes of the flesh—for it is not something visible or corporeal that we are talking about here—but the eyes of the mind, to which an understanding and awareness of the fear of God are evident and by which, as we have said above, we can discover what ought and ought not to be feared. The one who fears God does not fear the powers of this world.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:18

Since people of this kind have no sense, they have no fear of God. For “the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom,” says Solomon. But Scripture did not say that they did not have the fear of God. It said: “There is no fear of God before their eyes.” For seeing how evil their works were and not being horrified by them, they are said not to have the fear of God before their eyes.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 220] Tertullian on Romans 3:19

Whose grace, if not of that God from whom also came the law? Unless it be, forsooth, that the Creator intercalated His law for the mere purpose of producing some employment for the grace of a rival god, an enemy to Himself (I had almost said, a god unknown to Him), "that as sin had" in His own dispensation "reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto (eternal) life by Jesus Christ," His own antagonist! For this (I suppose it was, that) the law of the Creator had "concluded all under sin," and had brought in "all the world as guilty (before God)," and had "stopped every mouth," so that none could glory through it, in order that grace might be maintained to the glory of the Christ, not of the Creator, but of Marcion! I may here anticipate a remark about the substance of Christ, in the prospect of a question which will now turn up.

Source: Against Marcion Book V

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:19

Here we must consider carefully what this law is that speaks to those who are under the law. By what it says to them it deprives them of every excuse, so that they can find no hiding place for their sins. It is this which stops every mouth and makes the whole world accountable to God. Now if we want to take this as referring to the law of Moses, which without doubt spoke only to those who had been circumcised from their mother’s womb and had learned what the law was, how is it possible that by that law, which applies to only one nation, every mouth should be stopped and the whole world should be held accountable to God? What have the other nations to do with that law, and why does it affect the entire world? And how is it that a knowledge of sin is said to have originated with the law of Moses, when there were many before his time who were well aware of their sins?From this it appears that the apostle Paul is not speaking here about the law of Moses but about the natural law which is written on the hearts of men.… This natural law speaks to all men who are under that law with the sole exception, it seems to me, of those children who are not yet able to distinguish good from evil.…
When Paul says “the whole world” he is not talking about trees and rocks and so on but about the rational animal, i.e., the human being. Anything which is not rational is excluded from consideration in this context.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:19

It is clear that the law censures those who did not believe first of all their leader Moses nor their ancestors the prophets, whom they killed, nor the apostles who were their kinsmen according to the flesh, whose blood they spilled. They were always ungodly and rebellious against God, so as to be condemned by the law whose authority they thought should be despised.Paul says this because with the Jews bound in sin the whole world has become subject to God. For there is no doubt that the pagans were immersed in sins and wickedness and that for that reason the whole world bowed before God in order to obtain forgiveness. The “whole world” means Jews and Gentiles, from whom believers are set apart. Therefore when Paul affirms that the Jews, who had received God’s law and to whom the promise had been given, were bound in sin, there is no doubt that all the Gentiles were guilty of death … for all have been found guilty and need the mercy of God, whether they be Jews or Gentiles.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:19

This then is why, next to Isaiah, who confessedly aimed at them, he brought in David; that he might show that these things also belonged to the same subject. For what need was there, he means, that a prophet who was sent for your correction should accuse other people. For neither was the Law given to any else than you. And for what reason did he not say, we know that whatever things the prophet says, but whatever things the Law says? It is because Paul uses to call the whole Old Testament the Law. And in another place he says, "Do ye not hear the Law, that Abraham had two sons?" [Galatians 4:21-22] And here he calls the Psalm the Law when he says, "We know that whatever things the Law says, it says to them who are under the Law." Next he shows that neither are these things he said merely for accusation's sake, but that he may again be paving the way for faith. So close is the relationship of the Old Testament with the New, since even the accusations and reproofs were entirely with a view to this, that the door of faith might open brightly upon them that hear it. For since it was the principal bane of the Jews that they were so conceited with themselves (which thing he mentioned as he went on, "how that being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and going about to establish their own righteousness, they submitted not themselves to the righteousness of God") [Romans 10:3], the Law and the Prophet by being beforehand with them cast down their high thoughts, and laid low their conceit, that being brought to a consideration of their own sins, and having emptied out the whole of their unreasonableness, and seen themselves in danger of the last extremity, they might with much earnestness run unto Him Who offered them the remission of their sins, and accept grace through faith. And this it is then which St. Paul hints even here, when he says,

"Now we know that whatever things the Law says, it says to them who are under the Law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God."

Here then he exhibits them as destitute of the boldness of speech which comes of works, and only using a parade of words and behaving in a barefaced way. And this is why he uses so literal an expression, saying, "that every mouth may be stopped," so pointing out the barefaced and almost uncontrollable pomposity of their language, and that their tongue was now curbed in the strictest sense. For as an unsupportable torrent, so had it been borne along. But the prophet stopped it. And when Paul says, "that every mouth may be stopped," what he means is, not that the reason of their sinning was that their mouth might be stopped, but that the reason of their being reproved was that they might not commit this very sin in ignorance. "And all the world may become guilty before God." He does not say the Jew, but the whole of mankind. For the phrase, "that every mouth may be stopped," is the language of a person hinting at them, although he has not stated it clearly, so as to prevent the language being too harsh. But the words "that all the world may become guilty before God," are spoken at once both of Jews and of Greeks. Now this is no slight thing with a view to take down their unreasonableness. Since even here they have no advantage over the Gentiles, but are alike given up as far as salvation is concerned. For he would be in strict propriety called a guilty person, who cannot help himself to any excuse, but needs the assistance of another: and such was the plight of all of us, in that we had lost the things pertaining to salvation.

Source: Homily 7 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:19

Note that Paul was in the habit of referring to the entire Old Testament as “the law” … for here he calls a psalm “the law.”When he talks about every mouth being stopped, he does not mean that the purpose of their sinning was to shut them up but that the reason they were rebuked was that they might not sin in ignorance. Furthermore, it was not just the Jews he was referring to but the whole of mankind.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:19

In case the Jews might claim that these verses of the psalm were spoken about the Gentiles, Paul indicates that what has been said in the law has been said to those who are under the law. Of course, it is a question as to who is meant by saying that the fool claims that there is no God. The Jews did not say this in words but in deeds, for they claimed to know God but denied it by their behavior. Paul is not talking to the Gentiles here, because he has already made similar statements about them.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Romans 3:20

How, then, is the law still said to be not good by certain heresies that clamorously appeal to the apostle, who says, "For by the law is the knowledge of sin? ".
Well, the body tills the ground, and hastes to it; but the soul is raised to God: trained in the true philosophy, it speeds to its kindred above, turning away from the lusts of the body, and besides these, from toil and fear, although we have shown that patience and fear belong to the good man. For if "by the law is the knowledge of sin".
as those allege who disparage the law, and "till the law sin was in the world; "

Source: Clement of Alexandria Stromata Book II

[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Romans 3:20

The law did not create sin; it revealed it.

Source: STROMATA 2.7.34.4

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:20

Let us see in what way knowledge of sin comes through the law. It comes insofar as we learn through the law what to do and what not to do, what is sin and what is not sin. It is not, as the heretics claim, that God’s law is a bad root or a bad tree through which a knowledge of sin comes. Rather the law is like a medicine through which we perceive the true nature of our disease.… The medicine itself is good, not least because it enables us to isolate the disease and seek to cure it.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:20

Paul never says that they will not be justified before God because they have not kept the law of righteousness in the commandments but because they have refused to believe the sacrament of the mystery of God, which is in Christ. For God has declared that they should be justified by Christ and not by the law, which may justify for a time, but not before God. Therefore those who keep the law are justified in time, not before God, because faith, by which they are justified before God, is not in them. For faith is greater than the law. The law pertains to us but faith pertains to God. The law has a temporary righteousness, but faith has an eternal one. When Paul says “all flesh” he means every human being … but when he says “in the flesh” he means those who are bound by sin. For just as righteousness makes them spiritual, so also sins make them carnal, and they take the name from the deed.By faith the law is abolished, and faith then follows. What then is this law through which he says that sin is made known? Made known how? It is evident that long before Moses the patriarchs were not ignorant of sin. Joseph was thrown into prison, albeit by the wickedness of others, and both the butler and the baker of Pharaoh were in prison because of their sins. In what way then did sin lie dormant?
In fact, the law has three aspects to it. The first concerns the mystery of God’s divinity. The second is what is fitting according to natural law, which forbids sin. And the third is the deeds of the law, e. g., sabbaths, new moons, circumcision, etc. Here Paul refers to the natural law which was partly reformed and partly confirmed by Moses, which made sin known to all who were bound in wickedness.… The law shows the coming judgment of God and that no sinner will escape punishment, in case someone who has escaped for a time thinks that the law is an illusion. This is what the law shows: that sin will be dealt with by God.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:20

He springs upon the Law again, with forbearance however (for what he says is not an accusation of it, but of the listlessness of the Jews). Yet nevertheless he has been earnest here with a view (as he was going to introduce his discourse about faith) to show its utter feebleness. For if you boast in the Law, he means, it puts you to the greater shame: it solemnly parades forth your sins before you. Only he does not word it in this harsh way, but again in a subdued tone; "For by the Law is the knowledge of sin." And so the punishment is greater, but that because of the Jew. For the Law accomplished the disclosure of sin to you, but it was your duty then to flee it. Since then you have not fled you have pulled the punishment more sorely on yourself, and the good deed of the Law has been made to you a supply of greater vengeance. Now then having added to their fear, he next brings in the things of grace, as having brought them to a strong desire of the remission of their sins, and says [Romans 3:21]

Source: Homily 7 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:20

Once more Paul jumps on the law but this time with restraint, for what he says is an accusation not against the law but against the negligence of the covenant people.… The law accomplished its task of disclosing sin to them, but then it was their duty to flee it. But since they did not flee it, they brought an even greater punishment on themselves, and the good deeds of the law have just provided an excuse for greater chastisement from God.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:20

By the works of the law Paul means circumcision, the sabbath and the other ceremonies, which had less to do with righteousness than with carnal pleasure. Through the law comes neither forgiveness nor sin itself but rather recognition of sin. Through the law a man realizes what sin is, either because the natural law had been forgotten or because before the written law was given, the lesser sins [i.e., the sins which were more harmful to oneself than others, like lust, drunkenness, etc.] were not recognized as sins.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Romans 3:20

Some think that statements like this are an attack on the law. But they must be read very carefully, so that neither is the law condemned by the apostle nor is free will taken away from man. Therefore, let us distinguish the following four states of human existence: before the law, under the law, under grace and at rest. Before the law we follow the lust of the flesh. Under the law we are dragged along by it. Under grace we neither follow it nor are dragged along by it. At rest there is no lust of the flesh.Prior to being addressed by the law, we do not struggle, because not only do we lust and sin, we even approve of sinning.
Under the law we struggle but are defeated. We admit that what we do is evil and that we do not want to do it, but because there is as yet no grace, we are defeated. In this state we discover how far down we lie, and when we want to rise up and yet we fall, we are all the more gravely afflicted. The law is good because it forbids what ought to be forbidden and requires what ought to be required. But when anyone thinks he can fulfill the law in his own strength and not through the grace of his Deliverer, this presumption does him no good but rather harms him so much that he is seized by an even stronger desire to sin and by his sins ends up as a transgressor. So when the man who has fallen realizes that he cannot raise himself, let him cry to his Deliverer for help.
Then comes grace, which can pardon previous sins, give aid to the struggling, supplement justice with love and take away fear. When this takes place, although fleshly desires continue to fight against our spirit in this life and try to lead us into sin, yet our spirit does not give in to these desires because it is rooted in the grace and love of God and ceases to sin. For we do not sin by having these perverse desires but by giving in to them.
These desires arise from the mortality of the flesh, which we inherit from the first sin of the first man, which is why we are born carnal. Nor will they cease until, by the resurrection of the body, we shall obtain the transformation which has been promised to us. Then we shall be in the fourth state, where there is perfect peace. Perfect peace is the state in which nothing will resist us because we do not resist God. Free will existed perfectly in the first man, but in us, prior to grace, there is no free will which would enable us not to sin but only enough that we do not want to sin. But grace makes it possible not only for us to want to do what is right but actually to do it not in our own strength but by the help of our Deliverer, who at the resurrection will give us that perfect peace which is the consequence of good will.

Source: AUGUSTINE ON ROMANS 13-18

[AD 471] Gennadius of Constantinople on Romans 3:20

The purpose of the law, says Paul, is to give us a knowledge of sin not only to forbid the doing of things which are inappropriate but also to punish those who do such things.

Source: PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

[AD 202] Irenaeus on Romans 3:21

For verily I say unto you, Until heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall not pass from the law and the prophets till all come to pass."

Source: Against Heresies Book IV

[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Romans 3:21

And if, the Creator above all is confessed to be just, and the Lord to be the Son of the Creator; then the Lord is the Son of Him who is just. Wherefore also Paul says, "But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested; "

Source: Clement of Alexandria The Instructor Book I

[AD 220] Tertullian on Romans 3:21

It was once the law; now it is "the righteousness of God which is by the faith of (Jesus) Christ." What means this distinction? Has your god been subserving the interests of the Creator's dispensation, by affording time to Him and to His law? Is the "Now" in the hands of Him to whom belonged the "Then"? Surely, then, the law was His, whose is now the righteousness of God.

Source: Against Marcion Book V

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:21

We have just said that in the above verses Paul was speaking about the natural law and not about the law of Moses, but now it appears that there can be no doubt that he is referring to the law of Moses, by which the righteousness of God is made manifest through faith in Christ Jesus in all who believe, whether they are Jews or Gentiles, and who are justified not by works but by the grace of God, who has redeemed them in Jesus Christ. Does this mean that our interpretation of the foregoing was mistaken?…Just as there is nothing in this verse which makes it possible for us to argue that it is talking about the natural law and not about the law of Moses, so there is nothing in the preceding verses to indicate that they are talking about the law of Moses and not about the natural law. Thus we would argue that just as the foregoing cannot be used to interpret what we now have before us, so neither should our interpretation of it be altered simply because what follows cannot be read in the same way.
Does this mean that the apostle has contradicted himself? There are plenty of people who would like to think so!… But we shall try to show how this passage does not go against our interpretation of the foregoing one. We have often said, and have expounded this most clearly in the preface, that the apostle mentions many different kinds of law in this epistle, and only the most attentive reader will be able to detect when he is shifting from one to another.… The law of nature was able to explain the nature of sin and give us some knowledge of it, but the righteousness of God is above and beyond this, and the human mind is unable to attain it by its natural senses.… For this the law of Moses was required, to teach us what God’s righteousness is. Do not be surprised that the word law is used here in two different senses!…
Moreover, there is a way to tell which meaning of the word law is intended. The Greek language uses articles in front of proper names. Thus when the law of Moses is intended, the article is used, but when the natural law is meant, the article is omitted.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 382] Apollinaris of Laodicea on Romans 3:21

[The righteousness of God] has not been manifested in opposition to the law but as an increase of good and as the free gift of God, so that we may no longer be judged according to human righteousness, which is always under judgment, but that we may be made perfect by the righteousness which comes from God. For this is the righteousness which comes by faith in Christ to all who believe and which dwells in them all.

Source: PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:21

It is clear that the righteousness of God has now appeared apart from the law, but this means apart from the law of the sabbath, the circumcision, the new moon and revenge, not apart from the sacrament of God’s divinity, because the righteousness of God is all about God’s divinity. For when the law held them guilty, the righteousness of God forgave them and did so apart from the law so that until the law was brought to bear God forgave them their sin. And lest someone think that this was done against the law, Paul added that the righteousness of God had a witness in the Law and the Prophets, which means that the law itself had said that in the future someone would come who would save mankind. But it was not allowed for the law to forgive sin.Therefore, what is called the righteousness of God appears to be mercy because it has its origin in the promise, and when God’s promise is fulfilled it is called “the righteousness of God.” For it is righteousness when what is promised has been delivered. And when God accepts those who flee to him for refuge, this is called righteousness, because wickedness would not accept such people.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:21

Here he utters a great thing, and such as needed much proof. For if they that lived in the Law not only did not escape punishment, but were even the more weighed down thereby, how without the Law is it possible not only to escape vengeance, but even to be justified? For he has here set down two high points, the being justified, and the obtaining these blessings, without the Law. And this is why he does not say righteousness simply, but the righteousness of God, so by the worthiness of the Person displaying the greater degree of the grace, and the possibility of the promise. For to Him all things are possible. And he does not say, "was given," but "is manifested," so cutting away the accusation of novelty. For that which is manifested, is so as being old, but concealed. And it is not this only, but the sequel that shows that this is no recent thing. For after saying, "is manifested," he proceeds:

"Being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets."

Do not be troubled, he means, because it has but now been given, nor be affrighted as though at a thing new and strange. For of old both the Law and the Prophets foretold it. And some passages he has pointed out in the course of this argument, and some he will shortly, having in what came before brought in Habakkuk as saying, "the just shall live by faith" [Romans 1:17], but in what comes after, Abraham and David, as themselves also conversing with us about these things. Now the regard they had for these persons was great, for one was a patriach and a prophet, and the other a king and a prophet: and further the promises about these things had come to both of them. And this is why Matthew in the first beginning of his Gospel mentions both of these first, and then brings forward in order the forefathers. For after saying, "the Book of the Generation of Jesus Christ" [Matthew 1:1], he does not wait after Abraham to name Isaac also and Jacob, but mentions David along with (5 manuscripts "after") Abraham. And what is wonderful indeed is, that he has even set David before Abraham speaking on this wise, "the Son of David, the Son of Abraham," and then begins the catalogue of Isaac and Jacob, and all the rest in order. And this is why the Apostle here keeps presenting them in turns, and speaks of the righteousness of God being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets. Then that no one should say, How are we to be saved without contributing anything at all to the object in view? He shows that we also offer no small matter toward this, I mean our faith. Therefore after saying, "the righteousness of God," he adds straightway, "by faith unto all and upon all that believe."

Here again the Jew is alarmed by his not having anything better than the rest, and being numbered with the whole world. Now that he may not feel this, he again lowers him with fear by adding, "For there is no difference, for all have sinned." For tell me not that it is such and such a Greek, such and such a Scythian, such and such a Thracian, for all are in the same plight. For even if you have received the Law, one thing alone is there which you have learned from the Law — to know sin, not to flee from it. Next, that they may say, "even if we have sinned, still it is not in the same way that they did," he added, "and have come short of the glory of God." So that even if you have not done the same sins as others, still you are alike bereft of the glory, since you belong to those who have offended, and he that has offended belongs not to such as are glorified, but to such as are put to shame. Yet, be not afraid: for the reason of my saying this was not that I might thrust you into despair, but that I might show the love of the Lord (Δεσπότου]) toward man: and so he goes on; [Romans 3:24-25]

Source: Homily 7 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:21

Paul does not say that the righteousness of God has been “given” but that it has been “manifested,” thus destroying the accusation that it is something new. For what is manifested is old but previously concealed. He reinforces this point by going on to mention that the Law and the Prophets had foretold it.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:21

The righteousness which has been given to us freely by God, not acquired by our effort, has been made plain without the written law, and having been hidden in the law has been revealed with greater clarity by the examples of Christ, which are more obvious. The law and the prophets foretold that this righteousness would come in the last times, or perhaps this means that they both bore witness to the recognition of sin.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Romans 3:21

The righteousness of God is not that by which God is righteous but that with which he clothes man when he justifies the ungodly. To this the Law and the Prophets bear witness.… The righteousness of God is not manifested outside the law, since in that case it could not have been witnessed to in the law. It is a righteousness of God apart from the law because God confers it on the believer through the Spirit of grace without the help of the law.

Source: THE SPIRIT AND THE LETTER 15.9

[AD 1274] Thomas Aquinas on Romans 3:21

299. After showing that Jews and gentiles are equal as far as the state of previous guilt is concerned [n. 274], the Apostle now shows that they are also equal as far as the state of subsequent grace is concerned. In regard to this he does three things: first, he states his teaching; secondly, he explains something he had presupposed, there [v. 29; n. 318] at Or is God the God of the Jews only?; thirdly, he answers an objection, there [v. 31; n. 321] at Do we therefore destroy the law? 152 In regard to the first he does three things: first, he states his teaching; secondly, he manifests it, there [v. 22c; n. 304] at There is no distinction; thirdly, he draws the intended conclusion, there [v. 27; n. 313] at Where therefore is your glorying? In regard to the first he does three things: first, he states the relation between justice and the law; secondly, he gives the cause of justice, there [v. 22; n. 302] at the justice of God; thirdly, he shows that such justice is available to all, there [v. 22b; n. 303] at in all. 300. First, he sets down a twofold comparison or relation of justice to the Law [n. 301]. The first is that it is not caused by the Law. This is what he says: It has been stated that in times past God’s justice could not exist in virtue of the works of the Law, either because the just one himself fulfills the promises about men’s justification: "For I tell you that Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God’s truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs" (Rom 15:8). Or, rather, God’s justice, by which a person is justified by God, of which it says below: "not knowing the justice of God" (Rom 10:3). This justice of God, I say, has been manifested now, i.e., in the time of grace, by the teachings of Christ, by his miracles, as well as by the evidence of the fact, inasmuch as it is evident that many have been divinely made just. And this apart from the Law, i.e., without the Law causing righteousness: "You are severed from Christ, you who had 153 been justified by the Law; you have fallen away from grace" (Gal 5:4); "Soon my salvation will come, and my justice will be revealed" (Is 56:1). 301. But lest anyone suppose that this justice is contrary to the Law, secondly, he sets down another relation of justice to the Law when he says: although the law and the prophets bear witness to it. The Law bears witness to Christ’s justice by foretelling and prefiguring it: "If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote of me" (Jn 5:46); and also by its effect, for, since it could not justify, it bore witness that justice was to be sought elsewhere. The prophets bore witness by foretelling it: "To him all the prophets bear witness" (Ac 10:43). 302. Then he assigns the cause of this justice, and says the justice of God through the faith of Christ Jesus, i.e., which he delivered: "Looking to Jesus the perfecter of our faith" (Heb 12:2); or which is held concerning Him: "Because if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved" (Rom 10:9). God’s justice is said to exist through faith in Christ Jesus, not as though by faith we merit being justified, as if faith exists from ourselves and through it we merit God’s justice, as the Pelagians assert; but because in the very justification, by which we are made just by God, the first motion of the mind toward God is through faith: "Whoever would draw near to God must believe" (Heb 11:6). Hence faith, as the first part of justice, is given to us by God: "By grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing; for it is the gift of God" (Eph 2:8). 154 But this faith, out of which justice exists, is not the unformed faith about which James 2(:26) says, "Faith without works is dead," but it is faith formed by charity, about which Gal 5(:6) says, "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail, but faith [working through love]," through which Christ dwells in us; "that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith" (Eph 3:17), which does not happen without charity: "He who abides in love abides in God and God in him" (1 Jn 4:16). This is the faith about which Acts 15(:9) says, "He cleansed their hearts by faith," a cleansing that does not occur without charity: "Love covers all offenses" (Pr 10:12). 303. And lest anyone suppose that only the Jews are made just through this faith, third, he shows that this justice is common, when he adds in all. In other words this justice is in the heart, not in fleshly observances, about which Hebrews 9(:10) says that carnal observances were directed to the justification of the flesh, being regulations for the body and imposed until the time of reformation. And over all, because it transcends human power and merit: "Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us" (2Cor 3:5). He adds, who believe in him, which refers to the living faith, by which man is justified, as has been said. 304. Then when he says for there is no distinction, he manifests what he had said: first, in regard to the common availability of justice; secondly, as to its cause, there [v. 24; n. 306] at justified by grace; thirdly, as to its manifestation, there [v. 25b; n. 310] at for the manifestation. 305. First, therefore, he says: It has been stated that the righteousness of God is in all and above all who believe in Christ. For in this matter there is no distinction between 155 Jew and Gentile: "In Christ Jesus there is not Gentile and Jew" (Col 3:11), namely [a Jew] who has some distinction, as though the Jew does not need to be made just by God as the Gentile does. Since all have sinned, as has been shown above: "All we like sheep have gone astray" (Is 53:6) and for this reason need the glory of God, i.e., the justification that redounds to God’s glory. Furthermore, man should not ascribe this glory to himself: "Not to us, O Lord, not to us, but to thy name give glory" (Ps 115:1); "Give glory to God" (Ps 66:2). 306. Consequently, because all have sinned and cannot of themselves be justified, they need some other cause to make them just. This cause he indicates when he continues, being justified. First [cf. n. 307], he shows that such justification exists without the Law, i.e., that it does not come from the works of the Law, when he says being justified freely [gratis], i.e., without the merit of previous works: "You were sold for nothing and you shall be redeemed without money" (Is 52:3). And this is by his grace, namely, God’s, to whom glory is due on this account: "By the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor 15:10). 307. Secondly, he shows what is the cause of justification. First [cf. n. 308ff.], he discloses the cause itself, when he says, through redemption. For as is stated in John 8(:34), "Everyone who commits sin is a slave of sin." From this slavery a man is redeemed, if he makes satisfaction for sin. For example, if a man owes a king a fine for some guilty action, the one who paid the fine would be said to have redeemed him from the debt. Now, this debt involved the whole human race, which was infected by the sin of the first parent. Hence no other person could satisfy for the sin of the entire human race except Christ alone, who was immune from all sin. 156 Hence he adds, which is in Christ Jesus. As if to say: in no other could there be redemption: "Not with perishable things, such as silver and gold" (1 Pt 1:18). 308. Secondly, he shows whence this redemption has efficacy, when he says whom God put forward as an expiation. For Christ’s satisfaction was efficacious for justifying and redeeming by the fact that God had assigned him to this in his plan, which he designates when he says whom God put forward as an expiation: "According to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will" (Eph 1:11). Or put forward, that is, he put [him] forward for all, because the human race had no way of making satisfaction unless God himself gave them a redeemer and satisfier: "He sent redemption to his people" (Ps 111:9). And so, while making satisfaction, he redeems us from the debt of sin and obtains pardon for our sins, which the Psalmist begged: "Be propitious to our sins" (Ps 79:9); and this is why he calls him a propitiation. Propitiation. As a figure of this it was commanded in Exodus (25:17) that a propitiatory [seat], i.e., Christ, be placed on the ark, i.e., the Church. 369. Thirdly, he indicates how the effect of redemption reached us, when he says, by faith in his blood, i.e., faith concerning his blood poured out for us. For in order to satisfy for us, it was fitting that he undergo the penalty of death for us, a penalty man had incurred by sin, as indicated in Genesis 2(:17), "In the day that you eat of it you shall die." Hence 1Peter 3(:18) states, "For Christ also died for sins once for all." This death of Christ is applied to us through faith, by which we believe that the world has been redeemed by His death: "I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me 157 and gave himself for me" (Gal 2:20). For even among men payment made by one man does not benefit another, unless [that other] considers it valid. And so it is clear how there is justification through faith in Jesus Christ, as has been stated above. 310. But because he had stated above [n. 300] that God’s justice is manifested now, he considers this manifestation [n. 311ff]. First, he touches on the manner of this manifestation, saying for the manifestation. As if to say: I say that we are justified by the redemption of Christ and by faith in his blood, for the manifestation of his justice, i.e., to the end that God might show his justice, and this because of the remission of former sins. For in remitting former sins, which the Law could not remit or men by their own power sufficiently guard against, God showed that the justice by which they are made just by God is necessary for men. But only through the blood of Christ could sins both present and past be remitted, because the power of Christ’s blood works through man’s faith, which the men who lived before his passion had, just as we have: "Since we have the same spirit of faith . . . we too believe" (2 Cor 14:13). Hence another way of reading it is: for the remission of the sins of those men who preceded the passion of Christ: "He will tread our iniquities under foot and he will cast all our sins into the depth of the sea" (Mic 7:19). 311. Secondly, he shows the time of its manifestation, when he adds: in the forbearance of God, for the manifestation of his justice in this time. As if to say: former sins before the passion of Christ were in the forbearance of God as, so to speak, under a certain divine support [sustinentia], because he neither damned believers and penitents 158 for them nor completely absolved them, in the sense that, the sins notwithstanding, they might enter into glory. Or, according to another reading, it can mean that the saintly fathers themselves were in God’s forbearance, because they were detained in limbo, not suffering sensible pain but waiting to enter into glory through the passion of Christ: "Wait for the forbearance of God" (Sir 2:3). For this purpose, I say, previous sins and the ancient fathers were in the forbearance of God, namely to for the manifestation of his justice in this time, i.e., that in this time of grace he might manifest his justice perfectly by granting full remission of sins: "Now is the acceptable time; now is the day of salvation" (2 Cor 6:2). And this is what he had said above, namely that God’s justice is now manifest. Up to this present time former sins had be in the forbearance of God, in order to convince man of his lack of knowledge, since in the time of the law of nature man fell into errors and base sins; and of his lack of power, since after the written law, which gave knowledge of sin, man still sinned through weakness. 312. Thirdly, he shows that by remitting sins God’s justice is shown, whether it be taken as the justice of God by which he himself is just or as the justice by which he justifies others. Hence he continues: that he himself may be just, i.e., that by remitting sins God may appear to be just in himself, both because he remitted sins as he had promised and because it belongs to God’s justice to destroy sins by leading men back to his justice: "The Lord is righteous, he loves righteous deeds" (Ps 11:7). 159 19 Cf. n. 274, 299, and 304. And also the justifier of him who is of the faith of Jesus Christ, i.e., who approaches God through faith in Jesus Christ: "Whoever would draw near to God must believe" (Heb 11:6).

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:22

What else comes through faith in Jesus Christ except the righteousness of God which is the revelation of Christ? For it is by faith in the revelation of Jesus Christ that the gift long ago promised by God is acknowledged and received.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:22

In order to stop anyone from asking: “How can we be saved without contributing anything at all to our salvation?” Paul shows that in fact we do contribute a great deal toward it—we supply our faith!

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:22

This refers to the faith by which one believes in Jesus Christ. In this there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Romans 3:22

How could Paul have promised glory, honor and peace to the good works of Gentiles apart from the grace of the gospel? Because there otherwise is no acceptance of persons with God. And because it is not the hearers but the doers of the law who are justified, he argues that all, whether Jew or Gentile, shall alike have salvation in the gospel.

Source: THE SPIRIT AND THE LETTER 44

[AD 471] Gennadius of Constantinople on Romans 3:22

Paul says “for all” meaning first the Jews, in that it was from among them that salvation first arose, and then the Gentiles, in that from the Jews grace had abounded even to them so that now both share in it together. This grace is not given in general but only to those “who believe,” but it is common to all these without distinction.

Source: PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

[AD 202] Irenaeus on Romans 3:23

For as these men did not impute unto us (the Gentiles) our transgressions, which we wrought before Christ was manifested among us, so also it is not right that we should lay blame upon those who sinned before Christ's coming. For "all men come short of the glory of God".
We ought not, therefore, as that presbyter remarks, to be puffed up, nor be severe upon those of old time, but ought ourselves to fear, lest perchance, after

Source: Against Heresies Book IV

[AD 202] Irenaeus on Romans 3:23

We ought not to be puffed up or severe on those of ancient times, but ought ourselves to fear, lest after we have come to the knowledge of Christ we obtain no further forgiveness of sins. If later we do things displeasing to God, we are shut out of his kingdom.

Source: AGAINST HERESIES 4.27.2

[AD 223] Callistus I of Rome on Romans 3:23

For the apostle says: "All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; being justified freely by His grace, through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ: whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; to declare, `I say, 'at this time His righteousness, that He might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus."

[AD 258] Cyprian on Romans 3:23

That it is impossible to attain to God the Father, except by His Son Jesus Christ. In the Gospel: "I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh to the Father but by me." Also in the same place: "I am the door: by me if any man shall enter in, he shall be saved." Also in the same place: "Many prophets and righteous men have desired to see the things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them." Also in the same place: "He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life: he that is not obedient in word to the Son hath not life; but the wrath of God shall abide upon him." Also Paul to the Ephesians: "And when He had come, He preached peace to you, to those which are afar off, and peace to those which are near, because through Him we both have access in one Spirit unto the Father." Also to the Romans: "For all have sinned, and fail of the glory of God; but they are justified by His gift and grace, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus." Also in the Epistle of Peter the apostle: "Christ hath died once for our sins, the just for the unjust, that He might present us to God." Also in the same place: "For in this also was it preached to them that are dead, that they might be raised again." Also in the Epistle of John: "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same also hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath both the Son and the Father."

Source: Treatise XII Three Books of Testimonies Against the Jews

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:23

This includes both Jews and Greeks. For all here includes even the saints in order to show that nobody can keep the law without faith. For the law was given in such a way that faith was also embedded in it. This faith looked toward a future salvation. Thus the death of Christ benefits everyone, because it has here in this world taught what is to be believed and observed, and in the future it will deliver everyone from hell.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:23

There is no difference at all between the Greek, the Scythian, the Thracian or even the Jew, for all are in the same plight.… Even if you have not done the same sins as others, you have still been deprived of God’s glory just as they have been, because you are among those who have offended.… However, Paul was saying this not to cast them into despair but rather to show the love of the Lord toward man, as he goes on to say [in the following verses].

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:23

All sinners need the glory of God because they do not have their own.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 425] Severian of Gabala on Romans 3:23

Paul shows that nature has failed the Gentiles and that both nature and the law have failed the Jews, before going on to mention the grace of the gospel and saying: “What do we have by grace which is special and superior? Faith, made effective by the righteousness of Christ.” … Paul does not say that all have broken the law but that all have sinned in a general sense. Now the one who is lacking something tries to make up his deficiency. The Jews had the law, but they were lacking the fullness of grace.

Source: PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:24

Redemption is the word used for what is given to enemies in order to ransom captives and restore them to their liberty. Therefore human beings were held in captivity by their enemies until the coming of the Son of God, who became for us not only the wisdom of God, and righteousness and sanctification, but also redemption. He gave himself as our redemption, that is, he surrendered himself to our enemies and poured out his blood on those who were thirsting for it. In this way redemption was obtained for believers.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:24

They are justified freely because they have not done anything nor given anything in return, but by faith alone they have been made holy by the gift of God. Paul testifies that the grace of God is in Christ, because we have been redeemed by Christ according to the will of God so that once set free we may be justified, as he says to the Galatians: “Christ redeemed us by offering himself for us.” For he achieved this despite the fierce attacks of the devil, who was outwitted. For the devil received Christ (in hell) thinking that he could hold him there, but because he could not withstand his power he lost not only Christ but all those whom he held at the same time.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:24-25

See by how many proofs he makes good what was said. First, from the worthiness of the person, for it is not a man who does these things, that He should be too weak for it, but God all-powerful. For it is to God, he says, that the righteousness belongs. Again, from the Law and the Prophets. For you need not be afraid at hearing the "without the Law," inasmuch as the Law itself approves this. Thirdly, from the sacrifices under the old dispensation. For it was on this ground that he said, "In His blood," to call to their minds those sheep and calves. For if the sacrifices of things without reason, he means, cleared from sin, much more would this blood. And he does not say barely λυτρώσεως], but ἀπολυτρώσεως, entire redemption, to show that we should come no more into such slavery. And for this same reason he calls it a propitiation, to show that if the type had such force, much more would the reality display the same. But to show again that it was no novel thing or recent, he says, "fore-ordained" (Auth. Version marg.); and by saying God "fore-ordained," and showing that the good deed is the Father's, he shows it to be the Son's also. For the Father "fore-ordained," but Christ in His own blood wrought the whole aright.

"To declare His righteousness." What is declaring of righteousness? Like the declaring of His riches, not only for Him to be rich Himself, but also to make others rich, or of life, not only that He is Himself living, but also that He makes the dead to live; and of His power, not only that He is Himself powerful, but also that He makes the feeble powerful. So also is the declaring of His righteousness not only that He is Himself righteous, but that He does also make them that are filled with the putrefying sores (κατασαπέντας]) of sin suddenly righteous. And it is to explain this, viz. what is "declaring," that he has added, "That He might be just, and the justifier of him which believes in Jesus." Doubt not then: for it is not of works, but of faith: and shun not the righteousness of God, for it is a blessing in two ways; because it is easy, and also open to all men. And be not abashed and shamefaced. For if He Himself openly declares (ἐ νδείκνυται) Himself to do so, and He, so to say, finds a delight and a pride therein, how do you come to be dejected and to hide your face at what your Master glories in? Now then after raising his hearers expectations by saying that what had taken place was a declaring of the righteousness of God, he next by fear urges him on that is tardy and remissful about coming; by speaking as follows:

"On account of the relaxing of sins that were before." Do you see how often he keeps reminding them of their transgressions? Before, he did it by saying, "through the Law is the knowledge of sin;" and after by saying, "that all have sinned," but here in yet stronger language. For he does not say for the sins, but, "for the relaxing," that is, the deadness. For there was no longer any hope of recovering health, but as the paralyzed body needed the hand from above, so does the soul which has been deadened. And what is indeed worse, a thing which he sets down as a charge, and points out that it is a greater accusation. Now what is this? That the last state was incurred in the forbearance of God. For you cannot plead, he means, that you have not enjoyed much forbearance and goodness. But the words "at this time" are those of one who is pointing out the greatness of the power (Sav. forbearance) and love toward man. For after we had given all over, (he would say,) and it were time to sentence us, and the evils were waxed great and the sins were in their full, then He displayed His own power, that you might learn how great is the abundancy of righteousness with Him. For this, had it taken place at the beginning, would not have had so wonderful and unusual an appearance as now, when every sort of cure was found unavailing.

Source: Homily 7 on Romans

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:24

We have been justified without the works of the law, through baptism. In this way God has freely forgiven our sins even though we are undeserving. Christ has redeemed us with the blood of his death.… For we were all condemned to death, to which Christ handed himself over, though he had no need to, in order to redeem us by his blood.… Note also that Christ did not merely buy us but bought us “back,” because we were once his by nature, even though we were separated from him by our sins. If we stop sinning, our redemption will indeed be profitable for us.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 455] Prosper of Aquitaine on Romans 3:24

Grace is the glory of God, not the merit of him who has been freed.

Source: GRACE AND FREE WILL 10.2

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:25

Although the holy apostle teaches many wonderful things about our Lord Jesus Christ which are said mysteriously about him, in this passage he has given special prominence to something which, I think, is not readily found in other parts of Scripture. For having just said that Christ gave himself as a redemption for the entire human race so that he might ransom those who were held captive by sin … now he adds something even more sublime, saying that God put him forward “as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith.” This means that by the sacrifice of Christ’s body God has made expiation on behalf of men and by this has shown his righteousness, in that he forgave their previous sins, which they had committed in the service of the worst possible tyrants. God endured this and allowed these things to happen.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:25

Paul says this, because in Christ God put forward, i.e., appointed, himself as a future expiation for the human race if they believed. This expiation was by his blood. We have been set free by his death so that God might reveal him and condemn death by his passion. This was in order to make his promise clear, by which he set us free from sin as he had promised before. And when he fulfilled this promise he showed himself to be righteous.God knew the purpose of his lovingkindness, by which he determined to come to the rescue of sinners, both those living on earth and those who were held bound in hell. He waited a very long time for both. He nullified the sentence by which it seemed just that everyone should be condemned in order to show us that long ago he had decided to liberate the human race, as he promised through Jeremiah the prophet, saying: “I will forgive their iniquity and I will remember their sin no more.” And in case it might be thought that this promise was for the Jews only, he said through Isaiah: “My house will be called a house of prayer for all peoples.”26
For although the promise was made to the Jews, God knew in advance that the ungodly Jews would reject his gift. Therefore he promised that he would allow the Gentiles to share in his grace. In view of this the ungodly negligence of the Jews was thwarted.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 395] Gregory of Nyssa on Romans 3:25

Christ, being an “expiation by his blood,” teaches each one thinking of this to become himself a propitiation, sanctifying his soul by the mortification of his members.

Source: ON PERFECTION

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:25

Paul calls the redemption an expiation to show that, if the Old Testament type had such power, much more did its New Testament counterpart have it.… What does it mean “to show God’s righteousness”? It is like declaring his riches not only for him to be rich himself but also to make others rich.… Do not doubt, for righteousness is not of works but of faith.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:25

God has set forth Christ in public so that anyone who wants to be redeemed may draw near to him. Christ performs the work of expiation for all who believe that they need to be set free by his blood. Christ died for our former sins in order to reverse God’s judgment, by which he had finally determined to punish us for them.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Romans 3:25

The mercy seat was gold-plated and placed on top of the ark. On each side was the figure of a cherub. When the high priest approached it, the holy kindness of God was revealed.The apostle teaches us that Christ is the true mercy seat, of which the one in the Old Testament was but a type. The name applies to Christ in his humanity, not in his divinity. For as God Christ responded to the expiation made at the mercy seat. It is as man that he receives this label, just as elsewhere he is called a sheep, a lamb, sin and a curse.
Furthermore, the ancient mercy seat was bloodless because it was inanimate. It could only receive the drops of blood pouring from the sacrificial victims. But the Lord Christ is both God and the mercy seat, both the priest and the lamb, and he performed the work of our salvation by his blood, demanding only faith from us.

Source: INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

[AD 220] Tertullian on Romans 3:26

'" Such and so great futilities of theirs wherewith they flatter God and pander to themselves, effeminating rather than invigorating discipline, with how cogent and contrary (arguments) are we for our part able to rebut,-(arguments) which set before us warningly the "severity" of God, and provoke our own constancy? Because, albeit God is by nature good, still He is "just" too.

Source: On Modesty

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:26

God allowed all this so that afterward, that is to say in our time, he might show forth his righteousness. For at the end of the age, in the most recent times, God has manifested his righteousness and given Christ to be our redemption. He has made him our propitiator. If he had sent him as the propitiator at some earlier time, there would have been fewer people whose sins needed propitiating than there are now. For God is just, and therefore he could not justify the unjust. Therefore he required the intervention of a propitiator, so that by having faith in him those who could not be justified by their own works might be justified. These are the presuppositions on which the apostle’s exposition here is based.Paul was right to add “at the present time,” because at the moment God’s righteousness is revealed for our justification. But when the day of judgment comes, it will be revealed for retribution.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:26

The present time means our time, in which God has given what long before he had promised to give at the time at which he gave it. Paul has rightly said that God gave what he promised in order to be revealed as righteous. For he had promised that he would justify those who believe in Christ, as he says in Habakkuk: “The righteous will live by faith in me.” Whoever has faith in God and Christ is righteous.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:26

Paul wants to show that God had waited for sinners to reform themselves but that they had abused his patience and gone on to greater sins. The believer in Jesus is the only one who has been found righteous, and God has justified him not by works but by faith.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:27

Paul tells those who live under the law that they have no reason to boast basing themselves on the law and claiming to be of the race of Abraham, seeing that no one is justified before God except by faith.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:27

Paul is at great pains to show that faith is mighty to a degree which was never even fancied of the Law. For after he had said that God justifies man by faith, he grapples with the Law again. And he does not say, where then are the well doings of the Jews? Where their righteous dealing? But, "where is then the boasting?" so taking every opportunity of showing, that they do but use great words, as though they had somewhat more than others, and have no work to show. And after saying, "Where then is the boasting?" he does not say, it is put out of sight and has come to an end, but "it is excluded," which word rather expresses unseasonableness; since the reason for it is no more. For as when the judgment has come they that would repent have not any longer the season for it, thus now the sentence being henceforth passed, and all being upon the point of perishing, and He being at hand Who by grace would break these terrors, they had no longer the season for making a plea of amelioration wrought by the Law. For if it were right to strengthen themselves upon these things, it should have been before His coming. But now that He who should save by faith had come, the season for those efforts was taken from them. For since all were convicted, He therefore saves by grace. And this is why He has come but now, that they may not say, as they would had He come at the first, that it was possible to be saved by the Law and by our own labors and well-doings. To curb therefore this their effrontery, He waited a long time: so that after they were by every argument clearly convicted of inability to help themselves, He then saved them by His grace. And for this reason too when he had said above, "To declare His righteousness," he added, "at this time." If any then were to gainsay, they do the same as if a person who after committing great sins was unable to defend himself in court, but was condemned and going to be punished, and then being by the royal pardon forgiven, should have the effrontery after his forgiveness to boast and say that he had done no sin. For before the pardon came, was the time to prove it: but after it came he would no longer have the season for boasting. And this happened in the Jews' case. For since they had been traitors to themselves, this was why He came, by His very coming doing away their boasting. For he who says that he is a "teacher of babes, and makes his boast in the Law," and styles himself "an instructor of the foolish," if alike with them he needed a teacher and a Saviour, can no longer have any pretext for boasting. For if even before this, the circumcision was made uncircumcision, much rather was it now, since it is cast out from both periods. But after saying that "it was excluded," he shows also, how. How then does he say it was excluded? "By what law? Of works? Nay, but by the law of faith." See he calls the faith also a law delighting to keep to the names, and so allay the seeming novelty. But what is the "law of faith?" It is, being saved by grace. Here he shows God's power, in that He has not only saved, but has even justified, and led them to boasting, and this too without needing works, but looking for faith only. And in saying this he attempts to bring the Jew who has believed to act with moderation, and to calm him that has not believed, in such way as to draw him on to his own view. For he that has been saved, if he be high-minded in that he abides by the Law, will be told that he himself has stopped his own mouth, himself has accused himself, himself has renounced claims to his own salvation, and has excluded boasting. But he that has not believed again, being humbled by these same means, will be capable of being brought over to the faith. Do you see how great faith's preëminence is? How it has removed us from the former things, not even allowing us to boast of them?

Source: Homily 7 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:27

Paul is at great pains to show that faith is powerful to a degree which no one ever imagined the law could be. For after saying that God justifies man by faith, he takes up the question of the law again. He does not say: “Where are the good works of the Jews?” but: “Where is their boasting?” Thus he takes every opportunity to demonstrate that it was all talk and that they had no deeds to back them up.What is “the principle of faith”? This is salvation by grace. Here Paul shows God’s power in that he has not only saved, he has also justified and led them to boast in a different way—not relying on works but glorying only in their faith. In saying this Paul is trying to get believing Jews to behave with moderation and to reassure unbelieving Jews so that they might be persuaded to accept his point of view. For if the one who has been saved is proud because he abides by the law, he will be told that he has stopped his own mouth, that he has accused himself, that he has renounced any claim to salvation and that he has excluded boasting. But the unbeliever may be humbled by these same means and brought to accept the faith. See how great faith is, in that it has removed us from the former things and does not even allow us to boast of them!

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 428] Theodore of Mopsuestia on Romans 3:27

Now you say to me (says Paul), What new law has thrown the old one out? For when the ruler adds to the law, the law is changed. Paul answers: When the law of works came in it did not abolish the former law—on the contrary, it actually contained the former law. But when the law of faith appeared it did abolish the earlier law, having overcome the boasting which came from the law of works. These things have been given to us by the grace of God, which our forefathers, however hard they may have tried, were unable to obtain.

Source: PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

[AD 444] Cyril of Alexandria on Romans 3:27

For who will glory, or for what, when everyone has become worthless and gone out of the right way, and nobody does good works anymore? Therefore he says that all glorying is excluded.… How? We have acquired the forgiveness of our former sins and have been justified freely by the mercy and grace of Christ.

Source: COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 458] Theodoret of Cyrus on Romans 3:27

By “boasting” Paul means the proud spirits of the Jews and their excessive arrogance. For they thought they were the only ones who enjoyed God’s providence. But after the divine grace appeared and spread to all nations, the boasting of the Jews ceased.… Paul calls faith a law, recalling the words of the prophet Jeremiah: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers.”

Source: INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

[AD 1274] Thomas Aquinas on Romans 3:27

After showing that Jews have no advantage over the Gentiles either in regard to sin or to righteousness,19 he now presents the intended conclusion, by rejecting the boasts whereby they preferred themselves to the Gentiles. He does three things. First, he proposes that this boasting be excluded; secondly, the reason for this exclusion, there [v. 27b; n. 315] at by what law?; thirdly, the way it is excluded, there [v. 28; n. 317] at For we judge. 160 20 RSV Ps 68:30. The Hebrew text of this verse is obscure. 314. In regard to the first he does two things. First, he raises a question: Inasmuch as you, 0 Jew, are under sin just as the Gentile, and the Gentile is made just by faith just as you are, then what becomes of your boasting, whereby you take glory in the Law, as stated above, and on this ground wish to prefer yourself to the Gentile? "Your boasting is not good" (1 Cor 5:6); "Let us have no self-conceit, envying one another," (Gal 5:26). Secondly, he answers this, saying, it is excluded, i.e., is taken away: "The glory has been taken away from Israel" (1 Sam 4:21); "I will change their glory into shame" (Hos 4:7). Or excluded, i.e., expressly manifested. For the Jews gloried in the glory and worship of the one God, and he says that their glory was excluded, i.e., pressed out [expressam] by Christ, as artists who press out an image in silver are called "excludors," in accord with Ps 67:31, "That they might exclude those who were tried by silver."20 But the first meaning is more literal. 315. Then when he says by what law, he states the cause of this exclusion. Since the Jews’ boasting was about the Law, as has been stated above, it seemed that their boasting had to be excluded by something of the same genre, i.e., by some law. Therefore, he asks on what is their boasting to be excluded? For someone might suppose that the Apostle means their boasting was excluded by certain legal precepts which commanded greater works. That is why he asks, on the principle of works? As if to say: Do I say that their boasting has been excluded by some law of works? But he answers: No, but by the law of faith. 161 So it is plain that the Apostle alludes here to two laws, that of works and that of faith. At first glance it would seem that by the law of works is meant the Old Law and by the law of faith the New Law, through which the Gentile is made equal to the Jew. 316. But there is some doubt about this distinction. For even in the Old Law faith was necessary, just as it is in the New: "You who fear the Lord believe him" (Sir 2:8); "I believed; therefore I have spoken" (Ps l16:l0). And indeed, works are required in the New Law, namely, the works of certain sacraments, as commanded in Luke 22(:19), "Do this in memory of me" and of moral observances: "Be doers of the word and not hearers only" (Jas 1:22). Consequently, it should be said that what he calls the law of works is the law outwardly presented and written, through which men’s external works are directed, when it prescribes what he ought to do and forbids what ought to be avoided. But what he calls the law of faith is the law inwardly written, through which are directed not only external works but even the very motions of the heart, among which the act of faith is first: "Man believes with his heart" (Rom 10:10). Of this second law he speaks below (8:2): "The law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus." 317. Then when he says, For we hold, he shows how the Jews’ boasting is excluded by the law of faith, saying: For we apostles, being taught the truth by Christ, hold that a man, whomsoever he be, whether Jew or Gentile, is justified by faith: "He cleansed their hearts by faith" (Ac 15:9). And this apart from the works of the law. Not only without the ceremonial works, which did not confer grace but only signified it, but also without the works of the moral precepts, as stated in Titus 3(:5), "Not because of deeds done by us in righteousness." This, of course, means without 162 works prior to becoming just, but not without works following it, because, as is stated in Jas (2:26): "Faith without works," i.e., subsequent works, "is dead," and, consequently, cannot justify. 318. Then when he says Or is God the God of the Jews only?, he manifests something he had presupposed, namely, that the righteousness of faith stands in the same common relation to all. He had previously explained this with a reason based on the material cause, when he stated above (v. 23) that "all have sinned and need the glory of God," i.e., they are sinners, who need to be made just by the grace of God. But a proof based solely on the material cause is not enough, because matter is not moved to a form by itself without an agent cause. Accordingly, he now presents a proof based on the agent cause, i.e., the justifier, who is God: "It is God who justifies" (Rom 8:33). Now it is manifest that our God by justifying saves those whose God he is, according to Ps 68(:20), "Our God is a God of salvation." But he is the God not of the Jews only but of the Gentiles also; therefore, he justifies both. 319. On this point he does three things. First, he raises a question concerning the Jews, when he says, Is God the God of Jews only? It might seem that he is, because it says in Exodus 5(:3), "The God of the Hebrews called us." Hence it must be said that he was the God of the Jews only by the special worship paid to God by them; hence it is stated in Ps 76 (v.1): "In Judah God is known"; yet he was the God of all by his common reign over all things, as is stated in Ps 47(:8), "God is king of all the earth." 163 Secondly, he raises the question on the side of the Gentiles, saying: Is he not God of the Gentiles also? and he answers: Yes, of Gentiles also, whom he governs and rules: "Who would not fear thee, O king of the nations?" (Jer 10:7). Thirdly, there at for God indeed is one, he manifests what he had said with a sign, as if to say: It is clear that he is the God not only of the Jews but also of the Gentiles, for God indeed is one and he will justify the circumcised, i.e., the Jews, from faith, as is said in Galatians 5(:6), "In Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is of any avail." 320. According to the Gloss, "from faith" [ex fide] and "by faith" [per fidem] are exactly the same. However, a slight difference can be noted. For the preposition "from" [ex] sometimes designates a remote cause, while the preposition "through" [per] designates a nearer cause. Therefore, the Jews are said to be justified "from" faith because faith was the first cause from which circumcision and the other sacraments of the Law proceeded; thus, faith justified the Jews as a primary cause through intermediate causes. But the Gentiles are justified by faith itself immediately. 321. Then when he says Do we therefore overthrow he excludes an objection. For someone might claim that he is overthrowing the aforementioned Law; therefore, he asks: Do we therefore overthrow the law by faith, inasmuch as we say that men are justified without the works of the Law? He answers: By no means! in keeping with Matt 5(:18), "Not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law." Rather, he adds: On the contrary, we uphold the law, i.e., by faith we complete and fulfill the Law, as Matt 5(:17) says, "I have come not to abolish the law but to fulfill it." 164 This is true as regards the ceremonial precepts because, being figures, they were upheld and fulfilled by the fact that the truth signified by them is shown forth in the faith of Christ. This is also true as regards the moral precepts, because the faith of Christ confers the help of grace to fulfill the moral precepts of the Law and even adds special counsels, through which the moral precepts are more safely and securely kept.

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:28

It remains for us who are trying to affirm everything the apostle says, and to do so in the proper order, to inquire who is justified by faith alone, apart from works. If an example is required, I think it must suffice to mention the thief on the cross, who asked Christ to save him and was told: “Truly, this day you will be with me in paradise.” … A man is justified by faith. The works of the law can make no contribution to this. Where there is no faith which might justify the believer, even if there are works of the law these are not based on the foundation of faith. Even if they are good in themselves they cannot justify the one who does them, because faith is lacking, and faith is the mark of those who are justified by God.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:28

Paul says that a Gentile can be sure that he is justified by faith without doing the works of the law, e. g., circumcision or new moons or the veneration of the sabbath.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:28

When he had shown that by faith they were superior to the Jews, then he goes on with great confidence to discourse upon it also, and what seemed therein to annoy he again heals up. For these two things were what confused the Jews; one, if it were possible for men, who with works were not saved, to be saved without them, and another, if it were just for the uncircumcised to enjoy the same blessings with those, who had during so long a period been nurtured in the Law; which last confused them more by far than the former. And on this ground having proved the former, he goes on to the other next, which perplexed the Jews so far, that they even complained on account of this position against Peter after they believed. What does he say then? "Therefore we conclude, that by faith a man is justified." He does not say, a Jew, or one under the Law, but after leading forth his discourse into a large room, and opening the doors of faith to the world, he says "a man," the name common to our race. And then having taken occasion from this, he meets an objection not set down. For since it was likely that the Jews, upon hearing that faith justifies every man, would take it ill and feel offended, he goes on,

Source: Homily 7 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:28

Paul does not say a “Jew” or “one under the law” but widens the discussion and opens the doors of faith to the world, saying a “man,” i.e., the name common to our race.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:28

Some people misinterpret this verse in order to do away with the works of righteousness, saying that faith by itself is enough, even though Paul says elsewhere: “If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.” If this seems to contradict the sense of the other [verses], what works did the apostle mean when he said that a man is justified by faith, without works? Obviously, these are the works of circumcision, the sabbath and so on, and not the works of righteousness about which St. James says: “Faith without works is dead.” [In this verse] Paul is speaking about the man who comes to Christ and is saved when he first believes by faith alone. But by adding the works of the law Paul is saying that there are also works of grace which believers ought to perform.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 428] Theodore of Mopsuestia on Romans 3:28

Paul did not say “we hold” because he was himself uncertain. He said it in order to counter those who concluded from this that anyone who wished to could be justified simply by willing faith. Note carefully that Paul does not say simply “without the law,” as if we could just perform virtue by wanting to, nor do we do the works of the law by force. We do them because we have been led to do them by Christ. PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH.AUGUSTINE:This must not be understood in such a way as to say that a man who has received faith and continues to live is righteous, even though he leads a wicked life.

Source: QUESTIONS 76.1

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Romans 3:28

This must not be understood in such a way as to say that a man who has received faith and continues to live is righteous, even though he leads a wicked life.

[AD 1963] CS Lewis on Romans 3:28

The controversy about faith and works is one that has gone on for a very long time, and it is a highly technical matter. I personally rely on the paradoxical text: "Work out your own salvation... for it is God that worketh in you." [Philippians 2:12] It looks as if in one sense we do nothing, and in another case we do a damned lot. "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling," but you must have it in you before you can work it out.

Source: ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON CHRISTIANITY, from God in the Dock

[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Romans 3:29

"Is He the God of the Jews only, and not also of the Gentiles? Yes, also of the Gentiles: if indeed He is one God".
For if to live well and according to the law is to live, also to live rationally according to the law is to live; and those who lived rightly before the Law were classed under faith,

Source: Clement of Alexandria Stromata Book V

[AD 215] Clement of Alexandria on Romans 3:29

One righteous person is no different from another righteous person, whether Jew or Greek. For God is not only the Lord of the Jews but of all humanity. He is the Father of all who know him. To live well and according to the law is to live. To live rationally according to reason is to live. Those who lived rightly before the law were classed under faith and judged to be righteous. Those who were outside the law, having lived rightly, on hearing the voice of the Lord … may turn and believe with all speed.

Source: STROMATA 6.6

[AD 220] Tertullian on Romans 3:29

Is not all humankind one flock of God? Is not the same God both Lord and Shepherd of all nations?

Source: ON MODESTY

[AD 220] Tertullian on Romans 3:29

Tell me, is not all mankind one flock of God? Is not the same God both Lord and Shepherd of the universal nations? Who more "perishes" from God than the heathen, so long as he "errs? "Who is more "re-sought" by God than the heathen, when he is recalled by Christ? In fact, it is among heathens that this order finds antecedent place; if, that is, Christians are not otherwise made out of heathens than by being first "lost," and "re-sought" by God, and "carried back" by Christ.

Source: On Modesty

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:29

Here Paul gives a short sharp answer to those who would say that there is one God for the Jews and another for the Gentiles, i.e., one God of the law and another of the gospel.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:29

Undoubtedly there is only one God for everybody. For even the Jews cannot claim that their God is not the God of the Gentiles also, because they believe that the origin of all people is from the one Adam and that no one who comes willingly to the law may be prevented from accepting it. Some Gentiles actually went with the Israelites into the desert of Egypt, and the Israelites were ordered to accept them as long as they agreed to be circumcised and eat unleavened bread, or the Passover, together with the rest of them. Then again Cornelius, a Gentile who was not judaized, received the gift of God, and it is clear from holy Scripture that he was justified.

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:29

As if he said, On what foot does it then seem to you amiss that every man should be saved? Is God partial? So showing from this, that in wishing to flout the Gentiles, they are rather offering an insult to God's glory, if, that is, they would not allow Him to be the God of all. But if He is of all, then He takes care of all; and if He care for all, then He saves all alike by faith. And this is why he says, "Is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also." For He is not partial as the fables of the Gentiles (cf. Ov. Tr. I. ii. 5. sqq) are, but common to all, and One. And this is why he goes on,

Source: Homily 7 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:29

Paul shows that the Jews, by trying to put the Gentiles in their place, were insulting God’s glory by not allowing him to be the God of all. But if God is God of all, then he takes care of all, and if he takes care of all, then he saves all alike by faith.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:29

Did God create only the Jews, and is he exclusively concerned with them? For even if the Gentiles sinned, so did the Jews, and even if the Jews repent, so do the Gentiles. If Christ came to the Jews as promised by the law, he came to the Gentiles as well. For the prophets often spoke of the calling of the Gentiles. Paul wants to show the Gentiles that the first saints had not been circumcised and that Abraham was righteous before his circumcision. But he adds “as well,” so as not to appear to be excluding the Jews.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 202] Irenaeus on Romans 3:30

To God that human nature (hominem) which had departed from God; and therefore men were taught to worship God after a new fashion, but not another god, because in truth there is but "one God, who justifieth the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith.".
For it is truly "one God who "directed the patriarchs towards His dispensations, and "has justified the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith.".
Since this is the case, we must not seek for another Father besides Him, or above Him, since there is one God who justifies the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith.

Source: Against Heresies Book V

[AD 202] Irenaeus on Romans 3:30

We were prefigured in the Jews, and they are represented in us, that is, in the church, and they receive the reward for what they achieved.

Source: AGAINST HERESIES 4.22.2

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:30

Not only does Paul say that there is only one God for both Jews and Gentiles, but he adds that this God is the one who justifies the circumcised on the ground of their faith and the uncircumcised through their faith.… Neither the circumcision nor the uncircumcision enjoys any advantage in this.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:30

By “the circumcised” Paul means the Jews who have been justified by their faith in the promise and who believe that Jesus is the Christ whom God had promised in the law. By “the uncircumcised” he means the Gentiles who have been justified with God by their faith in Christ. Thus God has justified both Jews and Gentiles. For because God is one, everyone has been justified in the same way. What benefit then is there in circumcision? Or what disadvantage is there in uncircumcision when only faith produces worthiness and merit?

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:30

That is, the same is the Master of both these and those. But if you tell me of the ancient state of things, then too the dealings of Providence were shared by both, although in diverse ways. For as to you was given the written law, so to them was the natural; and they came short in nothing, if, that is, only they were willing, but were even able to surpass you. And so he proceeds, with an allusion to this very thing, "Who shall justify the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith," so reminding them of what he said before about uncircumcision and circumcision, whereby he showed that there was no difference. But if then there was no difference, much less is there any now. And this accordingly he now establishes upon still clearer grounds, and so demonstrates, that either of them stand alike in need of faith.

Source: Homily 7 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:30

There is only one God, who is Lord of all, both Jew and Gentile. Even in ancient times the blessings of providence were shared by both, although in different ways. The Jews had the written law, and the Gentiles had the natural law, but in this they lacked nothing, because if they tried hard enough they could always surpass the Jews in their observance.… If there was no difference then, much less is there any now, and this Paul establishes even more firmly by demonstrating that both alike stand in equal need of faith.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:30

Jews and Gentiles have both believed in the same God and in the same Christ.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 420] Jerome on Romans 3:30

Paul shows clearly that righteousness depends not on the merit of man but on the grace of God, who accepts the faith of those who believe without the works of the law.

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Romans 3:30

The difference of preposition (“on the ground of” versus “through”) does not indicate any difference of meaning but serves simply to vary the phrase.

[AD 220] Tertullian on Romans 3:31

But he had withal said above: "Are we, then, making void the law through faith? Far be it; but we are establishing the law " -forsooth in those (points) which, being even now interdicted by the New Testament, are prohibited by an even more emphatic precept: instead of, "Thou shalt not commit adultery," "Whoever shall have seen with a view to concupiscence, hath already committed adultery in his own heart; " and instead of, "Thou shalt not kill," "Whoever shall have said to his brother, Racha, shall be in danger of hell.

Source: On Modesty

[AD 253] Origen of Alexandria on Romans 3:31

Whoever does not believe in Christ, of whom Moses wrote in the law, destroys the law. But whoever believes in Christ, of whom Moses wrote, confirms the law through faith, because he believes in Christ.The Lord himself said: “I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it.” None of the saints nor even the Lord himself has destroyed the law. Rather its glory, which is temporal and transient, has been destroyed and replaced by a glory which is eternal and permanent.

Source: COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

[AD 384] Ambrosiaster on Romans 3:31

Paul says that the law is not nullified by faith but fulfilled. For its status is confirmed when faith bears witness that what it said would come has actually happened. Paul says this because of the Jews who thought that faith in Christ was inimical to the law because they did not understand the true meaning of the law. For Paul does not nullify the law when he says that it must come to an end, because he asserts that at the time it was given it was rightly given, but now it does not have to be kept any longer. In the law itself it is said that a time would come when the promise would be fulfilled and the law would no longer have to be kept.… “Behold the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers.”

Source: COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:31

Do you see his varied and unspeakable judgment? For the bare use of the word "establish" shows that it was not then standing, but was worn out (καταλελυμένον]). And note also Paul's exceeding power, and how superabundantly he maintains what he wishes. For here he shows that the faith, so far from doing any disparagement to the "Law," even assists it, as it on the other hand paved the way for the faith. For as the Law itself before bore witness to it (for he says, "being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets"), so here this establishes that, now that it is unnerved. And how did it establish? He would say. What was the object of the Law and what the scope of all its enactments? Why, to make man righteous. But this it had no power to do. "For all," it says, "have sinned:" but faith when it came accomplished it. For when a man is once a believer, he is straightway justified. The intention then of the Law it did establish, and what all its enactments aim after, this has it brought to a consummation. Consequently it has not disannulled, but perfected it. Here then three points he has demonstrated; first, that without the Law it is possible to be justified; next, that this the Law could not effect; and, that faith is not opposed to the Law. For since the chief cause of perplexity to the Jews was this, that the faith seemed to be in opposition to it, he shows more than the Jew wishes, that so far from being contrary, it is even in close alliance and coöperation with it, which was what they especially longed to hear proved.

But since after this grace, whereby we were justified, there is need also of a life suited to it, let us show an earnestness worthy the gift. And show it we shall, if we keep with earnestness charity, the mother of good deeds. Now charity is not bare words, or mere ways of speaking (προσρήσεις]) to men, but a taking care (προστασία) of them, and a putting forth of itself by works, as, for instance, by relieving poverty, lending one's aid to the sick, rescuing from dangers, to stand by them that be in difficulties, to weep with them that weep, and to rejoice with them that rejoice. [Romans 12:15] For even this last is a part of charity. And yet this seems a little thing, to be rejoicing with them that rejoice: nevertheless it is exceedingly great, and requires for it the spirit of true wisdom. And we may find many that perform the more irksome part (πεικρότερον), and yet want vigor for this. For many weep with them that weep, but still do not rejoice with them that rejoice, but are in tears when others rejoice; now this comes of grudging and envy. The good deed then of rejoicing when our brother rejoices is no small one, but even greater than the other: and haply not only greater than weeping with them that weep, but even than standing by them that are in danger. There are many, at all events, that have shared danger with men in danger, but were cut to the heart when they came into honor. So great is the tyranny of a grudging spirit! And yet the one is a thing of toils and labors, and this of choice and temper only. Yet at the same time many that have endured the harder task have not accomplished the one easier than it, but pine and consume away when they see others in honor, when a whole Church is benefited, by doctrine, or in any other fashion. And what can be worse than this? For such an one does not any more fight with his brother, but with the will of God. Now consider this, and be rid of the disease: and even if you be unwilling to set your neighbor free, at least set yourself free from these countless evils. Why do you carry war into your own thoughts? Why fill your soul with trouble? Why work up a storm? Why turn things upside down? How will you be able, in this state of mind, to ask forgiveness of sins? For if those that allow not the things done against themselves to pass, neither does He forgive, what forgiveness shall He grant to those who go about to injure those that have done them no injury? For this is a proof of the utmost wickedness. Men of this kind are fighting with the Devil, against the Church, and haply even worse than he. For him one can be on one's guard against. But these cloaking themselves under the mask of friendliness, secretly kindle the pile, throwing themselves the first into the furnace, and laboring under a disease not only unfit for pity, but even such as to meet with much ridicule. For why is it, tell me, that you are pale and trembling and standing in fear? What evil has happened? Is it that your brother is in honor, and looked up to, and in esteem? Why, you ought to make chaplets, and rejoice, and glorify God, that your own member is in honor and looked up to! But are you pained that God is glorified? Do you see to what issue the war tends? But, some will say, it is not because God is glorified, but because my brother is. Yet through him the glory ascends up to God: and so will the war from you do also. But it is not this, he will say, that grieves me, for I should wish God to be glorified by me. Well then! rejoice at your brother's being in honor, and then glorified is God again through you also; and all will say, Blessed be God that has His household so minded, wholly freed from envy, and rejoicing together at one another's goods! And why do I speak of your brother? For if he were your foe and enemy, and God were glorified through him, a friend should you make of him for this reason. But you make your friend an enemy because God is glorified by his being in honor. And were any one to heal your body when in evil plight, though he were an enemy, you would count him thenceforward among the first of your friends: and do you reckon him that gladdens the countenance of Christ's Body, that is, the Church, and is your friend, to be yet an enemy? How else then could you show war against Christ? For this cause, even if a man do miracles, have celibacy to show, and fasting, and lying on the bare ground, and does by this virtue advance even to the angels, yet shall he be most accursed of all, while he has this defect, and shall be a greater breaker of the Law than the adulterer, and the fornicator, and the robber, and the violator of supulchres. And, that no one may condemn this language of hyperbole, I should be glad to put this question to you. If any one had come with fire and mattock, and were destroying and burning this House, and digging down this Altar, would not each one of those here stone him with stones as accursed and a law-breaker? What then, if one were to bring a flame yet more consuming than that fire, I mean envy, that does not ruin the buildings of stone nor dig down an Altar of gold, but subverts and scornfully mars what is far more precious than either walls or Altar, the Teachers' building, what sufferance would he deserve? For let no one tell me, that he has often endeavored and been unable: for it is from the spirit that the actions are judged. For Saul did kill David, even though he did not hit him. [1 Samuel 19:10] Tell me, do you not perceive that you are plotting against the sheep of Christ when you war with His Shepherd? Those sheep for whom also Christ shed His Blood, and bade us both to do and to suffer all things? Do you not remind yourself that your Master sought your glory and not His own, but you are seeking not that of your Master but your own? And yet if you saw His then you would have obtained your own also. But by seeking your own before His, you will not ever gain even this.

What then will be the remedy? Let us all join in prayer, and let us lift up our voice with one accord in their behalf as for those possessed, for indeed these are more wretched than they, inasmuch as their madness is of choice. For this affliction needs prayer and much entreaty. For if he that loves not his brother, even though he empty out his money, yea, and have the glory of martyrdom, is no whit advantaged; consider what punishment the man deserves who even wars with him that has not wronged him in anything; he is even worse than the Gentiles: for if to love them that love us does not let us have any advantage over them, in what grade shall he be placed, tell me, that envies them that love him? For envying is even worse than warring; since he that wars, when the cause of the war is at an end, puts an end to his hatred also: but the grudger would never become a friend. And the one shows an open kind of battle, the other a covert: and the one often has a reasonable cause to assign for the war, the other, nothing else but madness, and a Satanic spirit. To what then is one to compare a soul of this kind? To what viper? To what asp? To what canker-worm? To what scorpion? Since there is nothing so accursed or so pernicious as a soul of this sort. For it is this, it is this, that has subverted the Churches, this that has gendered the heresies, this it was that armed a brother's hand, and made his right hand to be dipped in the blood of the righteous, and plucked away the laws of nature, and set open the gates for death, and brought that curse into action, and suffered not that wretch to call to mind either the birth-pangs, or his parents, or anything else, but made him so furious, and led him to such a pitch of phrenzy, that even when God exhorted him and said, "Unto you shall be his recourse, and you shall rule over him" [Genesis 4:7, Septuagint]; he did not even then give in. Yet did He both forgive him the fault, and make his brother subject to him: but his complaint is so incurable, that even if thousands of medicines are applied, it keeps sloughing with its own corruption. For wherefore are you so vexed, you most miserable of men? Is it because God has had honor shown Him? Nay, this would show a Satanical spirit. Is it then because your brother outstrips you in good name? As for that, it is open to you in turn to outstrip him. And so, if you would be a conqueror, kill not, destroy not, but let him abide still, that the material for the struggle may be preserved, and conquer him living. For in this way your crown had been a glorious one; but by thus destroying you pass a harder sentence of defeat upon yourself. But a grudging spirit has no sense of all this. And what ground have you to covet glory in such solitude? For those were at that time the only inhabitants of the earth. Still even then this restrained him not, but he cast away all from his mind, and stationed himself in the ranks of the devil; for he it was who then led the war upon Cain's side. For inasmuch as it was not enough for him that man had become liable to death, by the manner of the death he tried to make the tragedy still greater, and persuaded him to become a fratricide. For he was urgent and in travail to see the sentence carried into effect, as never satisfied with our ills. As if any one who had got an enemy in prison, and saw him under sentence, were to press, before he was out of the city, to see him butchered within it, and would not wait even the fitting time, so did the devil then, though he had heard that man must return to earth, travail with desire to see something worse, even a son dying before his father, and a brother destroying a brother, and a premature and violent slaughter. See you what great service envy has done him? How it has filled the insatiate spirit of the devil, and has prepared for him a table great as he desired to see?

Let us then escape from the disease; for it is not possible, indeed it is not, to escape from the fire prepared for the devil, unless we get free from this sickness. But free we shall get to be if we lay to mind how Christ loved us, and also how He bade us love one another. Now what love did He show for us? His precious Blood did He shed for us when we were enemies, and had done the greatest wrong to Him. This do thou also do in your brother's case (for this is the end of His saying "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye so love one another as I have loved you") [John 13:34]; or rather even so the measure does not come to a stand. For it was in behalf of His enemies that He did this. And are you unwilling to shed your blood for your brother? Why then do you even shed his blood, disobeying the commandment even to reversing it? Yet what He did was not as a due: but you, if you do it, are but fulfilling a debt. Since he too, who, after receiving the ten thousand talents, demanded the hundred pence, was punished not merely for the fact that he demanded them, but because even by the kindness done him he had not become any better, and did not even follow where his Lord had begun, or remit the debt. For on the part of the servant the thing done was but a debt after all, if it had been done. For all things that we do, we do towards the payment of a debt. And this is why Himself said, "When you have done all, say, We are unprofitable servants, we have done that which was our duty to do." [Luke 17:10] If then we display charity, if we give our goods to them that need, we are fulfilling a debt; and that not only in that it was He who first began the acts of goodness, but because it is His goods that we are distributing if we ever do give. Why then deprive yourself of what He wills you to have the right of? For the reason why He bade you give them to another was that you might have them yourself. For so long as you have them to yourself even you yourself hast them not. But when you have given to another, then have you received them yourself. What charm then will do as much as this? Himself poured forth His Blood for His enemies: but we not even money for our benefactor. He did so with His Blood that was His own: we will not even with money that is not ours. He did it before us, we not even after His example. He did it for our salvation, we will not do it even for our own advantage. For He is not to have any advantage from our love toward man, but the whole gain accrues unto us. For this is the very reason why we are bidden to give away our goods, that we may not be thrown out of them. For as a person who gives a little child money and bids him hold it fast, or give it the servant to keep, that it may not be for whoever will to snatch it away, so also does God. For He says, Give to him that needs, lest some one should snatch it away from you, as an informer, for instance, or a calumniator, or a thief, or, after all these are avoided, death. For so long as you hold it yourself, you have no safe hold of it. But if you give it Me through the poor, I keep it all for you exactly, and in fit season will return it with great increase. For it is not to take it away that I receive it, but to make it a larger amount and to keep it more exactly, that I may have it preserved for you against that time, in which there is no one to lend or to pity. What then can be more hard-hearted, than if we, after such promises, cannot make up our minds to lend to him? Yes, it is for this that we go before Him destitute and naked and poor, not having the things committed to our charge, because we do not deposit them with Him who keeps them more exactly than any. And for this we shall be most severely punished. For when we are charged with it, what shall we be able to say about the loss of them? what pretext to put forward? What defense? For what reason is there why you did not give? Do you disbelieve that you will receive it again? And how can this be reasonable? For He that has given to one that has not given, how shall He not much rather give after He has received? Does the sight of them please you? Well then, give much the more for this reason, that you may there be the more delighted, when no one can take them from you. Since now if you keep them, you will even suffer countless evils. For as a dog, so does the devil leap upon them that are rich, wishing to snatch from them, as from a child that holds a sippet or a cake. Let us then give them to our Father, and if the devil see this done, he will certainly withdraw: and when he has withdrawn, then will the Father safely give them all to you, when he cannot trouble, in that world to come. For now surely they that be rich differ not from little children that are troubled by dogs, while all are barking round them, tearing and pulling; not men only, but ignoble affections; as gluttony, drunkenness, flattery, uncleanness of every kind. And when we have to lend, we are very anxious about those that give much, and look particularly for those that are frank dealers. But here we do the opposite. For God, Who deals frankly, and gives not one in the hundred, but a hundred-fold, we desert, and those who will not return us even the capital, these we seek after. For what return will our belly make us, that consumes the larger share of our goods? Dung and corruption. Or what will vainglory? Envy and grudging. Or what nearness? Care and anxiety. Or what uncleanness? Hell and the venomous worm! For these are the debtors of them that be rich, who pay this interest upon the capital, evils at present, and dreadful things in expectation. Shall we then lead to these, pray, with such punishment for interest, and shall we not trust the same to Christ (4 manuscripts om. τᾥ) Who holds forth unto us heaven, immortal life, blessings unutterable? And what excuse shall we have? For how do you come not to give to Him, who will assuredly return, and return in greater abundance? Perhaps it is because it is so long before He repays. Yet surely He repays even here. For He is true which says, "Seek the kingdom of heaven, and all these things shall be added to you." [Matthew 6:33] Do you see this extreme munificence? Those goods, He says, have been stored up for you, and are not diminishing: but these here I give by way of increase and surplus. But, besides all this, the very fact of its being so long before you will receive it, does but make your riches the greater: since the interest is more.

For in the case of those who have money lent them, we see that this is what the lenders do, lending, that is, with greater readiness to those who refund a long time after. For he that straightway repays the whole, cuts off the progression of the interest, but he that keeps possession of it for a longer time, makes also the gain from it greater. Shall we then, while in man's case we are not offended at the delay, but even use artifices to make it greater, in the case of God be so little-minded, as on this very ground to be backward and to retract? And yet, as I said, He both gives here, and along with the reason mentioned, as planning also some other greater advantage to us, He there keeps the whole in store. For the abundance of what is given, and the excellency of that gift, transcends this present worthless life. Since in this perishable and doomed body there is not even the possibility of receiving those unfading crowns; nor in our present state, perturbed and full of trouble, and liable to many changes as it is, of attaining to that unchangeable unperturbed lot. Now you, if any one were to owe you gold, and while you were staying in a foreign country, and had neither servants, nor any means to convey it across to the place of your abode, were to promise to pay you the loan, would beseech him in countless ways to have it paid down not in the foreign land, but at home rather. But do you think right to receive those spiritual and unutterable things in this world? Now what madness this would show! For if you receive them here, you must have them corruptible to a certainty; but if you wait for that time, He will repay you them incorruptible and unalloyed. If you receive here, you have gotten lead; but if there, tried gold. Still He does not even deprive you of the goods of this life. For along with that promise He has placed another also, to the following effect, That every one that loves the things of the world to come, shall receive "an hundred-fold in this life present, and shall inherit eternal life." [Matthew 19:29] If then we do not receive the hundred-fold, it is ourselves that are to blame for not lending to Him Who can give so much, for all who have given have received much, even though they gave but little. For what great thing, tell me, did Peter give? Was it not a net that was broken [Luke 5:6-11], and a rod and a hook only? Yet still God opened to him the houses of the world, and spread before him land and sea, and all men invited him to their possessions. Or rather they sold what was their own, and brought it to their feet, not so much as putting it into their hands, for they dared not, so great was the honor they paid him, as well as their profuseness. But he was Peter, you will say! And what of this? O man! For it was not Peter only to whom He made this promise, neither said He, You, O Peter, only art to receive an hundred-fold, but "every one whosoever has left houses or brethren shall receive an hundredfold." For it is not distinction of persons that He recognizes, but actions that are rightly done. But a circle of little ones is round about me, one will say, and I am desirous of leaving them with a good fortune. Why then do we make them paupers? For if you leave them everything, you are still committing your goods to a trust that may deceive you. But if you leave God their joint-heir and guardian, you have left them countless treasures. For as when we avenge ourselves God assists us not, but when we leave it to Him, more than we expect comes about; so in the case of goods, if we take thought about them ourselves, He will withdraw from any providence over them, but if we cast all upon Him, He will place both them and our children in all safety. And why are you amazed that this should be so with God? For even with men one may see this happening. For if you do not when dying invite any of your relatives to the care of your children, it often happens, that one who is abundantly willing feels reluctancy, and is too modest to spring to the task of his own accord. But if you cast the care upon him, as having had a very great honor shown him, he will in requital make very great returns. If then you would leave your children much wealth, leave them God's care. For He Who, without your having done anything, gave you a soul, and formed you a body, and granted you life, when He sees you displaying such munificence and distributing their goods to Himself along with them, must surely open to them every kind of riches. For if Elijah after having been nourished with a little meal, since he saw that that woman honored him above her children, made threshing-floors and oil-presses appear in the little hut of the widow, consider what loving caring the Lord of Elijah will display! Let us then not consider how to leave our children rich, but how to leave them virtuous. For if they have the confidence of riches, they will not mind anything besides, in that they have the means screening the wickedness of their ways in their abundant riches. But if they find themselves devoid of the comfort to be got from that source, they will do all so as by virtue to find themselves abundant consolation for their poverty. Leave them then no riches that you may leave them virtue. For it is unreasonable in the extreme, not to make them, while we are alive, lords of all our goods, yet after we are dead to give the easy nature of youth full exemption from fear. And yet while we are alive we shall have power to call them to good account, and to sober and bridle them, if they make an ill use of their goods: but if after we are dead we afford them, at the time of the loss of ourselves, and their own youthfulness, that power which wealth gives, endless are the precipices into which we shall thrust those unfortunate and miserable creatures, so heaping fuel upon flame, and letting oil drop into a fierce furnace. And so, if you would leave them rich and safe withal, leave God a debtor to them, and deliver the bequest to them into His hands. For if they receive the money themselves, they will not know even who to give it to, but will meet with many designing and unfeeling people. But if you beforehand puttest it out to interest with God, the treasure henceforward remains unassailable, and great is the facility wherewith that repayment will be made. For God is well pleased at repaying us what He owes, and both looks with a more favorable eye upon those who have lent to Him, than on those who have not; and loves those the most to whom He owes the most. And so, if you would have Him for your Friend continually, make Him your Debtor to a large amount. For there is no lender so pleased at having those that owe to him, as Christ (6 manuscripts God) is rejoiced at having those that lend to Him. And such as He owes nothing to, He flees from; but such as He owes to, He even runs unto. Let us then use all means to get Him for our Debtor; for this is the season for loans, and He is now in want. If then you give not unto Him now, He will not ask of you after your departing hence. For it is here that He thirsts, here that He is an hungered. He thirsts, since He thirsts after your salvation; and it is for this that He even begs; for this that He even goes about naked, negotiating immortal life for you. Do not then neglect Him; since it is not to be nourished that He wishes, but to nourish; it is not to be clothed, but to clothe and to accoutre you with the golden garment, the royal robe. Do you not see even the more attached sort of physicians, when they are washing the sick, wash themselves also, though they need it not? In the same way He also does all for the sake of you who art sick. For this reason also He uses no force in demanding, that He may make you great returns: that you may learn that it is not because He is in need that He asks of you, but that He may set right that you need. For this reason too He comes to you in a lowly guise, and with His right hand held forth. And if you give Him a farthing, He turns not away: and even if you reject Him, He departs not but comes again to you. For He desires, yea desires exceedingly, our salvation: let us then think scorn of money, that we may not be thought scorn of by Christ. Let us think scorn of money, even with a view to obtain the money itself. For if we keep it here, we shall lose it altogether both here and hereafter. But if we distribute it with abundant expenditure, we shall enjoy in each life abundant wealthiness. He then that would become rich, let him become poor, that he may be rich. Let him spend that he may collect, let him scatter that he may gather. But if this is novel and paradoxical, look to the sower, and consider, that he cannot in any other way gather more together, save by scattering what he has and, letting go of what is at hand. Let us now sow and till the Heaven, that we may reap with great abundance, and obtain everlasting goods, through the grace and love toward man, etc.

Source: Homily 7 on Romans

[AD 407] John Chrysostom on Romans 3:31

Paul’s use of the word uphold shows that the law was failing.… The purpose of the law was to make man righteous, but it had no power to do that. But when faith came it achieved what the law could not do, for once a man believes he is immediately justified. Faith therefore established what the law intended and brought to fulfillment what its provisions aimed for. Consequently faith has not abolished the law but perfected it.

Source: HOMILIES ON ROMANS 7

[AD 418] Pelagius on Romans 3:31

Is the law which enjoins us to be circumcised unnecessary? Not at all! On the contrary, we enable it to stand firm when we show that what it said is true, viz., that (spiritual) law would follow after (physical) law, (spiritual) testament after (physical) testament, (spiritual) circumcision after (physical) circumcision.

Source: PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Romans 3:31

How should the law be upheld if not by righteousness? By a righteousness, moreover, which is of faith, for what could not be fulfilled through the law is fulfilled through faith.

Source: AUGUSTINE ON ROMANS 19

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Romans 3:31

Do we then make void freedom of choice through grace? God forbid! Rather, we establish freedom of choice. As the law is not made void by faith, so freedom of choice is not made void but established by grace. Freedom of choice is necessary to the fulfillment of the law. But by the law comes the knowledge of sin; by faith comes the obtaining of grace against sin; by grace comes the healing of the soul from sin’s sickness; by the healing of the soul comes freedom of choice; by freedom of choice comes the love of righteousness; by the love of righteousness comes the working of the law. Thus, as the law is not made void but established by faith, since faith obtains the grace whereby the law may be fulfilled, so freedom of choice is not made void but established by grace, since grace heals the will whereby righteousness may freely be loved.

Source: THE SPIRIT AND THE LETTER 52

[AD 430] Augustine of Hippo on Romans 3:31

The law is confirmed by faith. Apart from faith the law merely commands, and it holds guilty those who do not fulfill its commands, so that it might thereafter turn to the grace of the Deliverer those groaning in their inability to do what is commanded.

Source: QUESTIONS 66.1

[AD 444] Cyril of Alexandria on Romans 3:31

On account of his humanity Emmanuel is called a prophet, who following Moses is the mediator between God and humanity. The law was a shadow, but even so it presented an image of the truth. Furthermore, the truth hardly destroys its images; rather it makes-them clearer.

Source: COMMENTARY ON ROMANS