"I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie, my conscience bears witness to me in the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 9:1).

1. Did not what I said in the previous discourse about Paul's love for Christ seem great and supernatural to you? Truly, all this in itself is great and surpasses every word. Yet what has been said now is as much superior to the past as the former surpasses all that can be said of us. I myself could not imagine that there could be anything higher than what was said in the last conversation, but what we had to read today is much more brilliant than anything before. He himself (Paul), foreseeing this, announced at the very beginning that he intended to touch on a still more important thing, which many would not believe. And, above all, he testifies to the truth of what he intends to say. This is what many people usually do when they intend to talk about something incredible for the majority and of which they themselves are firmly convinced. "I speak the truth," he says, "I do not lie," in this my conscience is my witness. "Great is my sorrow, and the continual anguish of my heart: I would that I myself should be separated from Christ" (Rom. 9:2-3).

What do you say, Paul? From the beloved Christ, from whom neither the kingdom nor hell, nor the visible, nor the imaginable, nor the like, could separate you - from this (Christ) do you now desire to be excommunicated? What happened? Have you not changed, have you not ruined your love? No, he said, don't be afraid, I only strengthened this love in myself. How then do you desire to be excommunicated, to seek alienation and such a rupture after which there is no other to be found? Because I love Him very much, he says. How, tell me, and how? Your words look like a riddle, don't they? But it seems better that we first know what excommunication is, and then begin to ask him about it, and thus understand this inexpressible and extraordinary love. So, what is excommunication? Listen to what Paul himself says: "Whoever does not love the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be accursed" (1 Cor. 16:22), that is, let him be excommunicated from all and become a stranger to all. As no one dares to touch merely with his hands, or to approach the gift which is consecrated to God, so (the Apostle) calls by this name, in the opposite sense, the excommunicated one, cutting him off from all and distancing him as far as possible, commanding all to depart and flee from such a man with great fear. No one dared to approach the gift out of respect, and everyone left the excommunicated for another, opposite feeling. Thus excommunication is one, and both are equally made alien to men, but the method of excommunication is not the same, but one is contrary to the other. One is removed from the one because it is consecrated to God, and from the other because it is alienated from God and excommunicated from the church. In the latter sense, Paul also said: "I would that I myself should be excommunicated from Christ." He did not simply say, "I would will," but he strengthens his speech and says, "I would pray." But if you are troubled by words that seem very weak, then you reflect on the matter itself, and not only on the fact that (Paul) wanted to be excommunicated, but also on the very reason why he desired it, then you will see all the excessiveness of his love. For example, he performed circumcision, but if we pay attention not to the action, but to the intention and cause of the action, we are even more surprised at him. He not only circumcised, but also cut his hair and offered a sacrifice, but, of course, we do not consider him a Jew for this, but, on the contrary, say that in consequence of this he especially became free and pure from Judaism and became a true servant of Christ. Wherefore, when thou seest that (Paul) circumcises and offers sacrifices, thou dost not consequently condemn him for his adherence to Judaism, but chiefly praise him for this, both the stranger of Judaism, and seeing that he desires to be excommunicated, do not be troubled by this, but, having understood the reason why he desires it, glorify him all the more for it. And if we do not inquire into the causes, we must call Elijah a murderer, and Abraham not only a murderer, but also a child-murderer, and also accuse Phinehas and Peter of murder; if we do not observe this rule, we will draw absurd conclusions not only about the saints, but also about God of all kinds. In order to avoid this in all such cases, let us examine the circumstances, paying attention to the cause, intention, time, and everything that can serve to justify what happened. So we should do now with this blessed soul. So, what is the reason? Again the beloved Jesus Himself. And, of course, (the Apostle) does not call Him the cause, since he says: I would like to be excommunicated from Him "for my brethren." But this only indicates his humility; he does not want to give the slightest pretense that he speaks of a great deed, and that he offers it as a gift to Christ. Wherefore he said, "Of my kinsmen according to the flesh," in order to conceal the greatness of the work. And that he desired all things for Christ, hear the following. Having said, "Those who are my kinsmen according to the flesh," he added, "To whom belong the adoption and the glory, and the covenants, and the law, and the worship, and the promises; and their fathers, and of them Christ according to the flesh, God who is over all, blessed for ever, Amen" (Rom. 9:4-5).

2. What is it, you will ask. If (Paul) wanted to be excommunicated in order that others might believe, then he ought to pray for the Gentiles for the same, and if he prays only for the Jews, he shows that he desired excommunication not for Christ's sake, but for the sake of kinship with the Jews. And, of course, if he prayed only for the Gentiles, it would not be so obvious, and since he prays only for the Jews, he clearly shows that he cares about this for the glory of Christ. I know that my words seem strange to you, but if you do not make a noise, I will immediately try to explain them. It was not without reason that (the Apostle) said what he said, but on the ground that all, reproaching God, said that those were expelled and deprived of honor who were worthy to be called the sons of God, received the law, knew God before all nations, enjoyed special glory, served God before all the world, received the promises, were fathers of their tribes, and, most importantly, became the forefathers of Christ Himself (this is the meaning of the words: "Christ according to the flesh is of them") and that, in their place, people from the Gentiles were brought in, who had never known God. As they were blaspheming God in saying this, Paul, hearing this, was tormented, grieved for the glory of God, and desired to be excommunicated, if possible, on condition that the Jews should be saved, that such blasphemy might cease, and that it would not seem that God had deceived their forefathers, to whom he had promised gifts. (Paul wanted to be excommunicated) so that you would understand how much he was crushed by the opinion that God's promise to Abraham had not been fulfilled: "To your descendants I will give this land" (Gen. 12:7). After these words (the Apostle) added: "Not that the word of God should not come to pass" (Rom. 9:6). Here he shows that he is willing to endure all these things for the word of God, that is, for the promise made to Abraham. As Moses seems to have interceded for the Jews, but did all things for the glory of God [he said, Cease thy wrath, lest it be said that thou could not save, and that thou didst bring them out to slay them in the wilderness" (Deuteronomy 9:28)], so Paul says, I desired to be excommunicated, lest it be said that the promise of God was not fulfilled, that God did not do what he promised, and put his word into action. Therefore he does not say this for the Gentiles (for they were not given the promise, they did not serve God and did not blaspheme Him), but prayed for it for the Jews who had received the promise, and for others who were close to him. Do you notice that if he had prayed for the Gentiles, it would not have been so clearly revealed that he was doing it for the glory of Christ; and since he desired to be excommunicated for the Jews, he made it especially clear that he desired it for Christ's sake. Wherefore he said, To them belong adoption, and glory, and covenants, and statutes, and worship, and promises. With them, says (the Apostle), the law that testifies of Christ, all covenants were made with them, Christ Himself came from them, from them were all the fathers who received the promises, but nevertheless the opposite happened, and they were deprived of all blessings. That is why I am tormented, he says, and if it were possible to be excluded from the face of Christ, alienated not from the love of Christ (let this not be, for he did it out of love for Christ), but from blessedness and glory, I would agree to this on the condition that my Lord should not be subjected to blasphemy, and that I should not hear from anyone, as if His works were a shadow, as if God promised some and gave to others, Christ was born of some, and saved others. He made promises to the ancestors of the Jews, and, leaving their descendants, brought into their possession of their goods those who had never known Him; The Jews labored, learning the law and reading the prophets, but the Gentiles, who had recently turned away from altars and idols, became higher than the Jews. Where is God's Providence here? And so, says (the Apostle), although this opinion is unjust, no matter what they say about my Lord, I would gladly lose the kingdom and that unspeakable glory, and I would endure all the calamities, considering it the greatest consolation for me in sorrows not to hear any more blasphemy against my beloved. If you have not yet understood what has been said, then imagine that many fathers often decided to do this because of their children and preferred to be separated from them, only to see them prosperous, considering their happiness above the pleasure of living with them. But since we are far from such love, we cannot understand what has been said.

And some are not even worthy to hear Paul's teaching, and are so far removed from that greatest love that they think that (Paul) is speaking here of temporal death. Of such I can say that they do not know Paul as much as the blind do not know the sunbeam and much more. He who died every day was exposed to clouds of danger, and said, "Who shall separate us from the love of God, tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword"? - He who did not confine himself to what has been said, who has passed through heaven and the heaven of heavens, has outstripped the angels, archangels, and all things above, who has comprehended the present and the future at the same time, visible and cognizable by the intellect, sad, useful, and contained in both, and in general has left nothing unattended, who did not confine himself to this, but also assumed another similar creation, not yet existing, as he could have mentioned temporal death after all this, definitely about something important.

3. It's not so, no. This opinion is characteristic of worms nesting in manure. If (the apostle) had spoken of this, how would he have desired to be excommunicated from Christ? After all, such a death united more with the face of Christ and contributed to the delivery of future glory. But there are also those who dare to assert another, more ridiculous thing. He did not desire death, they say, but to be the treasure and gift of Christ. And who among the lowest and most unworthy people would not desire this? But how could (Paul) want this for his relatives? And so, abandoning fables and idle talk (which are not worth refuting, since they are like childish babbling), let us return again to the very saying (of the Apostle), and, enjoying the sea of his love, let us safely swim and meditate on the ineffable flame, of which, no matter what anyone speaks, will say nothing worthy. (Paul's love) was wider than any sea, stronger than any fire, no word can depict it in its worth, only (Paul) comprehended it as one who possessed it perfectly. And so, let us repeat again his words: "I would like to be excommunicated myself." What does it mean: "I myself"? I, who have become a common teacher, have rendered innumerable services, expect innumerable crowns for myself, have loved Christ so much that I prefer His love to everything in the world, I burn daily for Him and put everything below love for Him. (Paul) was concerned not only to be loved by Christ, but also to love Him deeply, and especially about the latter. Therefore, this was the only thing he had in mind and easily endured everything; In all his affairs he watched one thing - to satisfy this beautiful love. And he wanted to be excommunicated, but, as it could not happen, he tries to defend himself against accusations and, having presented what everyone was talking about, tries to refute it. And before proceeding to an explicit justification, he has already planted some of its seeds. When he says, "To whom belong the adoption and the glory, and the covenants, and the ordinance of the law, and the worship, and the promises," he means nothing else than that God desired that they also should be saved; this He proved by what He had done before, that Christ came from them, and He had made promises to their fathers. But the Jews, through their own ingratitude, rejected the beneficence. Therefore (the Apostle) presents that which testifies only to the gift of God, and does not serve to their praise, but adoption, glory, promises, and the law were precisely the work of God's grace. Having presented all this, and considering how much care God and His Son had taken for the salvation of the Jews, he cried out with a loud voice and said, "He is blessed for ever." Amen. He sends such thanksgiving for all to the Only-begotten Son of God. That if others blaspheme, he says, we, knowing His mysteries, His ineffable Wisdom and all-embracing Providence, know well that He is worthy not of blasphemy, but of glorification. But, not content with his own conscience, he tries to bring and judge the argument, uses the strongest expressions against the Jews, and does not leave them until he has destroyed their suspicion. In order not to seem that he converses as with enemies, he also says: "Brothers! the desire of my heart, and my prayer to God for Israel unto salvation" (Romans 10:1), and here, among other things he said, he tries to show that he does not say out of enmity what he should say against them; therefore he does not refuse to call them relatives and brothers. And although everything that he said and said for Christ, he nevertheless attracts their favor to himself, first paves the way for his word, deflects from himself any suspicion about what he intends to say against them, and only then proceeds to consider what occupied many. Many, as I have remarked above, have asked, why did those who received the promise perish, and those who had never heard of it were saved before the first? Thus, removing this perplexity, he offers his solution before the objection. Lest someone say, "What, do you care more about the glory of God than God himself?" Does He really need your help so that His word does not perish? Answering this, (the Apostle) also says: I did not say this in the sense that the word of God did not come to pass, but to prove love for Christ. And although the works were fulfilled in this form, we do not doubt the words of God, and affirm that the promise is immutable. God said to Abraham: "And I will give thee and thy descendants after thee the land, and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed" (Gen. 17:8; 12:3). Therefore, he says, let us see what kind of seed it is, since not all that came from Abraham are his seed, which is why it is said: "Not all the children of Abraham who are of his seed, but it is said, In Isaac thy seed shall be called" (Rom. 9:7).

4. If, therefore, you know who is called the seed of Abraham, you will see that the promise was given to his seed, and you will understand that the word of God has not been unfulfilled. Tell me, then, who is called seed? It is not I who speaks, answers (the Apostle), but the Old Testament explains itself, saying thus: "In Isaac thy seed shall be called" (Gen. 21:12). Explain what is meant by "in Isaac"? "That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of promise who are counted as seed" (Rom. 9:8). Notice the wisdom and loftiness of Paul's mind: in his explanation he says that the children according to the flesh are not the children of Abraham, but the children of God; thus he connects the Old Testament with the present and shows that Isaac was not simply the son of Abraham. Its meaning is this: those who were born after the example of Isaac are the children of God and the seed of Abraham. Wherefore he said, "In Isaac thy seed shall be called," that thou mayest understand that those who are born in the image of Isaac are especially the seed of Abraham. How was Isaac born? Not by the law of nature, not by the power of the flesh, but by the power of the promise. What does it mean, according to the power of the promise? "At the same time I will come" to you, "and Sarah will have a son" (Rom. 9:9). That was the promise, and the word of God formed and begat Isaac. And what happened? Although the woman's bed and womb contributed to birth, it was not the power of the womb, but the power of promise that produced the child. In the same way, we are born of the word of God, because that which gives birth to us and forms us in the font of water is the word of God, and on the other hand, when we are baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, we are born. This is not a birth by nature, but by the promise of God. As He foretold the birth of Isaac and fulfilled it, so He foretold our birth a long time before through all the prophets, and then brought it to pass. Do you notice how many proofs he has presented, and how He who gave great promises fulfilled them with all ease? But if the Jews say that the words, "In Isaac thy seed shall be called," mean that those who are born of Isaac are due to him as his seed, then they must consider the Edomites and all those who are descended from him as sons of Isaac, because their forefather Esau was the son of Isaac. But not only are the Edomites not called children now, but they were even very alien to the Israelites. Do you see that it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but that in nature itself the birth again through baptism is foreshadowed? But if you tell me about the beds, I can also tell you about the water. And as here everything is of the Spirit, so there everything is of promise, because the beds, because of barrenness and old age, were colder than water. Therefore, with all attention, let us comprehend our nobility and show a life worthy of it; there is nothing carnal and earthly in this, let it not be in us either. Not sleep, not carnal lust, not embraced and not the arousal of passion, but God's love for mankind has accomplished everything. And just as there, when age gave no hope, so here, when old age came as a result of sins, a new man suddenly appeared, and we all became the sons of God, the seed of Abraham. "And this is not one thing; but so it was with Rebekah, when she conceived two sons at the same time by Isaac our father" (Rom. 9:10). The question was important, therefore (the apostle) gives many arguments and tries by all means to eliminate the difficulty. If it was strange and unexpected that the Jews, after so many promises, perished, it seems more strange that we, who had not expected anything of the kind, should have entered into their possession. It was the same as if the king's son, who had been promised succession to the throne after the king, had been reduced to the rank of disenfranchised, and in his place a man guilty of innumerable crimes, and condemned to death, had been taken out of prison, and had received the power that belonged to the former. What can be said about this? That the son is unworthy? But even he is unworthy, even more so. This means that it was necessary either to punish together or to honor together. A similar thing, I say, happened to the Gentiles and to the Jews, and even much stranger. That all are unworthy, (the Apostle) declared above, saying: "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23); but it is extraordinary that, while all were unworthy, only the pagans were saved. After this, another question may be proposed, namely, if God did not intend to fulfill the promises made to the Jews, why did he give them? For only men, not knowing the future and often being deceived, promise gifts even to those who are not worthy to receive them; but He who foresees the present and the future, who clearly knew that the Jews would become unworthy of the promises, and consequently would receive none of what was said, for which purpose he made the promises?

5. How did Paul decide this? He showed who Israel was, to whom God had made promises. And when this was shown, it was also proved that all the promises were fulfilled. Pointing to this, he said, "For not all are those Israelites who are of Israel." (The apostle) used the name of Israel and not of Jacob, because that name was a sign of his virtue, righteousness, and the gift received from above, and that Jacob had seen God. But you will say: all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and if all have sinned, then why have some been saved, and others have perished? Because not all wanted to come, although by the will of God all are saved, because all are called. However, (the Apostle) does not yet say this, but solves the question more broadly, deducing from other examples a new question, as before he solved the greatest difficulty by another difficulty. When asked how, after the justification of Christ, all others began to participate in this righteousness, he cited the example of Adam, saying: "For if by the transgression of one death reigned by means of one, how much more shall those who receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness reign in life" (Romans 5:17). He does not decide the question of Adam, but by his example he solves his own question, and proves that there is a greater reason to admit that he who died for them should have over them the power he wants. To the majority it seems not quite in accordance with reason that all should suffer punishment for the sin of one, but it is much more in accordance with reason and more fitting for God, that for the service of one all should be justified. But, nevertheless, (the Apostle) did not solve the first difficulty, because the more it remained obscure, the more the Jew's mouth was blocked, the perplexity about the last difficulty passed to the first, and the last became clearer because of this. So here also (Paul) settles the question by means of new difficulties, because he had a contest with the Jews. For this reason he does not fully solve the examples presented by him, to which, as one who competed with the Jews, he was not obliged, but, nevertheless, by these examples he explains everything that he needed. Why are you surprised, he says, that some of the Jews were saved, and others were not? Everyone knows that in antiquity the same thing happened to the patriarchs. Why is Isaac alone called the seed of Abraham, although Abraham was the father of Ishmael and many others? Was it not because Ishmael's mother was a slave? But what does this have to do with the son? However, I do not argue, let Ishmael be expelled for the sake of his mother.

Here it is no longer possible for you to refer to the slavery of the mother, as in relation to Ishmael, and to the fact that they were not born from the same womb, as in the case of the children of Keturah and Sarah, but here at the same hour the sickness of birth was felt. Wherefore Paul, as if to consider the latter example clearer, says that it was not only Isaac who came to pass, "so it was with Rebekah, when she conceived two sons at the same time by Isaac our father. For when they were not yet born, and had done nothing good or evil (that the purpose of God in election should not come from works, but from Him who called), it was said to her, The greater shall be in bondage to the lesser, as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated" (Rom. 9:10-13). Why was one loved and the other hated? Why did one serve, and the other received services? Is it because the one was wicked and the other was good? But before they were born, the one was honored, and the other was condemned, because before they were born, God said, "The greater shall be in bondage to the lesser." Why did God say this? For He does not wait, as a man, for the end of the work, in order to see who is good and who is not, but even before that He knows who is wicked and who is not. The same thing happened to the Israelites, and much more miraculously. What shall we say, he continues, of Esau and Jacob, one of whom was wicked and the other good? And the Israelites had a common sin: they all worshipped the calf, yet some were pardoned, and others were not. "I will have mercy," he says, "whom I will have mercy on, and whom I will have mercy on" (Rom. 9:15). The same can be seen in those who are punished. What can be said about Pharaoh, why was he punished and subjected to such a great punishment? Because he was cruel and rebellious. But was he the only one, and there was no other? Why was he punished so severely? Why did God not speak of the whole people in relation to the Jews, and also did not bestow the same honor on all? It is said: "Though there be as many people as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them shall be converted" (Isa. 10:22). And why only the remainder? You see how much perplexity the subject in question causes. And it is quite natural: whenever the enemy can be put into difficulty, do not immediately offer a solution. For if he himself is guilty of his ignorance, why should you be exposed to unnecessary danger? Why do you make him more audacious by taking everything upon yourself?

6. Tell me, Jew, on what basis do you, being in such great difficulties and not being able to solve any of them, trouble us with questions about the calling of the Gentiles? And I can certainly point out the right reason why the Gentiles are justified, but you (the Jews) have lost the promises. So, what is this reason? That they are justified by faith, and you want to be justified by the works of the law, and because of your obstinacy you have lost everything. "Not understanding the righteousness of God, and striving to set up their own righteousness, they did not submit to the righteousness of God" (Romans 10:3). In short, the blessed (apostle) in these words gives a general solution to the problem, but for greater clarity we examine each word in detail, bearing in mind that the desire of Blessed Paul was to teach by means of all that has been said that God alone knows the worthy, and none among men, and although it seems to them that they know well, they are constantly mistaken in their conclusion. He who knows the mysteries already clearly knows who is worthy of crowns, and who is worthy of punishment and torment. Wherefore He rebuked and punished many who were considered wicked, and bore witness that they were not so. He pronounces sentence not on the recall of slaves, but on his own strict and impartial judgment, and does not wait for the end of the case, so that one is declared bad, and the other is not. However, in order not to say anything unclear again, let us turn to the words of the Apostles. "And this is not one thing; but so it was with Rebekah when she conceived by Isaac." Although I could, he reasons, point to the children of Keturah, I do not speak of this, but in order to gain the victory perfectly, I cite as an example those born of the same father and of the same mother. Both were born of Rebekah and Isaac, the legitimate son of an irreproachable and beloved father, to whom it is said, "In Isaac thy seed shall be called," and who became the father of us all. And if he is our father, then those who are descended from him must also be fathers, but this was not the case. You see that this happened not only to Abraham, but also to his son, that faith and virtue shine everywhere, and they signify true kinship. From this we learn that Abraham's children are called his children not only by birth, but also because they are worthy of the virtue of the one who begat them. And if they were called only by one birth, then Esau should have enjoyed equal rights with Jacob, because Esau also descended from a dead womb, and his mother was barren. But it was not only birth that was required, but also a disposition, which is not something accidental, but serves for edification in our lives. And (the Apostle) does not say that, since the one was good and the other vicious, the former was therefore preferred, so that they would not immediately object to him: How so? Who is kinder? Are they of the Gentiles, or those of the circumcision? Though (the Apostle) might have referred to actual experience in this, he does not do so, because it seemed to him very cruel, and he has entrusted everything to the divine reason, with which no one can dare to fight, except the most insane. "For when they were not yet born," he says, "and did nothing good or evil, it was said to her, 'The greater shall be in bondage to the lesser,' and proves that there is no profit in nobility according to the flesh, but spiritual virtue, which God knows even before works. "For when they were not yet born, and had done nothing good or evil (that the purpose of God in election should not come from works, but from him who called), it was said to her, The greater shall be in bondage to the lesser." To choose from birth is a matter of foreknowledge: that the election of God, which was accomplished by will and foreknowledge, may be revealed; From the first day, God knew and foretold both good and bad. Tell me, therefore, that thou hast read the law and the prophets, and that thou hast served so long. He who knows and searches the soul also knows who is worthy of salvation. Therefore, yield to the incomprehensible in election; He alone knows correctly whom to crown. How many were there who, judging by the outward evidence of their deeds, seemed better than Matthew? But he who knows the mysteries and knows how to test the faculties of the mind, noticed the pearl lying in the mud, and, passing by others and marveling at the grace of Matthew, chose him and, adding his own grace to the nobility of his will, showed him worthy. Whoever is able to judge of these arts temporarily, or of all other matters, chooses not what ignorant people approve, but what he himself knows perfectly, and what the ignorant approve of, and approve of what they reject. This is done in the selection of horses by those who train them, as well as by the appraiser of expensive stones and those who are versed in the other arts. How much more will God, the lover of mankind, the infinite Wisdom, the only one who knows everything clearly, not adhere to people's opinions, but will pronounce judgment on everything according to His own wisdom, which is completely accurate and unstumbling. Thus He chose the publican, the robber, and the harlot, and the chief priests, the elders, and the rulers, and He dishonored and rejected them.

7. Everyone knows that the same thing happened to the martyrs. Many of the people who were completely rejected were crowned during the persecutions, and, on the contrary, others, who were considered great by the people, stumbled and fell. Therefore, do not demand an account from the Creator and do not ask why one was crowned and the other punished. He knows how to do everything justly, which is why He said: "He loved Jacob, but hated Esau." That this was right, you learned from the consequences, but God knew it clearly before the end. It requires not only the discovery of deeds, but also a noble will and prudent thought. Such a person, even if he has ever sinned under the influence of some circumstance, will soon be reformed, even if he happens to become stubborn in vice, he will not be contemptible, but the omniscient God will soon remember him. Thus David, having committed murder and adultery, soon atoned for his crimes, because he was carried away by circumstances and did not do it because of attachment to vice, but the Pharisee, who did nothing of the kind and even boasted of good works, destroyed everything by evil will. "What shall we say? Is it really unrighteousness with God? By no means" (Rom. 9:14). Thus, God is just both to us and to the Jews. Then (the Apostle) adds another thought, which is darker than the previous one. Which one? "He saith unto Moses, Whom I shall have mercy on, I will have mercy; whom I have pity, I will have compassion" (Rom. 9:15). Again he strengthens the objection, interrupting it halfway, resolving and again introducing another difficulty. But in order to make these words clearer, it is necessary to interpret them. Even before the birth of Jacob and Esau, God (the Apostle) reasoned, said, "The greater shall be in bondage to the lesser." So, what then? Is God unjust? Not at all. Listen further. Jacob and Esau differed in virtue, the other in vices, but the Jews all committed the same sin, namely, they drained the calf. And yet, some were punished, and others were not. That is why God said: "Whom I have mercy on, I will have mercy; whom I pity, I will pity." It is not your business, Moses, to know who is worthy of love for mankind, but leave it to Me. And if it is not Moses' business to know this, much less is it ours. Therefore, (the Apostle), in order to convince the objector and the dignity of the person, not only cited these words, but mentioned to whom they were spoken. "For He speaks to Moses," he says. Having expressed the solution of the difficulty, he interrupts it halfway, introducing a new opposite, and says thus: "Therefore mercy does not depend on him who wills, nor on him who strives, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, For this very reason have I appointed thee, that I might shew my power over thee, and that my name might be preached in all the earth" (Rom. 9:16-17). As he said above that some were saved, and others were punished, so here he says that Pharaoh was preserved for punishment. Then he introduces the opposition again. "Whomsoever He willeth He has mercy on; but whom he wants, he hardens. You will say to me, "For what else does he accuse?" For who can resist His will" (Rom. 9:18-19)? Do you see how (the apostle) tried by all means to make the question difficult? And He does not immediately give a solution, doing this also with benefit, but first stops the mouth of the objector, saying thus: "Who art thou, O man, that thou quarrelt with God" (Rom. 9:20)? (The Apostle)

And he does not say that it is impossible to solve it, but what? He also considers it criminal to ask about it, since what God has said should be obeyed, and not investigated, even though we do not know the reason. For this reason (the Apostle) says: "Who are you, O man, that you argue with God"? Do you notice how he has humiliated and brought down arrogance? "Who are you, man"? Are you a member of power? Have you not been appointed a judge for God? But in comparison with God, you cannot be called anything, nor can you say that you are this or that, but nothing. And to ask: "Who are you, a man"? - is much more derogatory than to say: you are nothing. And in general, by his question (the Apostle) expresses great indignation. He did not say, "Who are you that speaketh unto God?" - but: "you argue with God", that is, you who argue resist. To say: "It should have been so", "it should not have been so" means to quarrel. Do you see how the Apostle frightened, struck, made you tremble more than ask and be curious? This is characteristic of the most experienced teacher - not to follow the desire of the disciples in everything, but to lead them according to his own will, first to pluck out thorns, and then to sow seeds, and not suddenly give an answer to every question. "Shall the work say to him that made it, Why hast thou made me so? Does not the potter have power over the clay, that from the same mixture he may make one vessel for honorable use, and another for low use" (Rom. 9:20-21)?

8. Here (the apostle) does not destroy free will, but shows to what extent God is to be obeyed. In demanding an account from God, you have to feel yourself no more than a frailty. And not only should you not contradict and ask questions, but you should not even speak, not think, and be like that soulless clay which is obedient to the potter's hands and is used by him as he wishes. For this very reason the Apostle took such an example, not as a model of life, but as a proof of obedient and silent obedience. And this should be observed everywhere - not to take the examples in their entirety, but to choose from them the necessary one, for which they are given, and everything else should be discarded. When it is said: "He bowed down, lies like a lion" (Num. 24:9), then we take only the concept of invincible and terrible, and not the bestial or anything else peculiar to a lion, and again, when it is said: "I will attack them like a bear deprived of children" (Hos. 13:8), then we take the concept of vengeance, and when it is said: "God is a consuming fire" (Deut. 4:24), then we take the concept of exterminating punishment; so here it is necessary to understand the words: clay, potter, and vessel. When (the Apostle) adds and says: "Does not the potter have power over the clay, that from the same mixture he may make one vessel for honorable use, and another for low use"? Do not think that Paul says this in the sense of creation or to prove the necessity of the will, but to express authority and the difference in dispositions. If we do not understand his words in this sense, then many absurd consequences will result. For if it is a question of will, then God will be the creator of both good and evil, and man will not be in the least guilty of both; then it will turn out that Paul, crowning free will everywhere, contradicts himself. Thus, (the Apostle) wants to reveal here nothing else than to convince the listener to obey God in all its fullness and not to demand an account from Him in anything. As the potter, he argues, makes from the same mixture what he pleases, and no one contradicts him, so do not ask God and do not be curious why He punishes some of the same kind and rewards others, but revere Him and imitate the clay, and as it is subject to the hands of the potter, so do you submit to the will of the Administrator of the universe. He does nothing without a purpose, and as it happens, although you yourself do not comprehend the mystery of Wisdom. You allow the potter to prepare different products from the same mixture and do not blame him for this, but you demand an account of punishments and honors from God, and do not let Him know who is worthy and who is not worthy, but since the composition itself has one and the same essence, you assume that the will is the same for all. What unreasonable! For it does not depend on the potter that from one and the same mixture some things go for the honorable, and others for low use, but on the disposition of those who use the product, so here the matter depends on free will. Moreover, as I have remarked above, the example must be taken in this one respect, that man must not contradict God, but leave everything to His incomprehensible wisdom. The example must be more extensive than the subject on which it is given, so that it may have a stronger effect on the hearers, since if it were not more extensive and did not contain more, it could not touch and excite the objector as it should. So (the apostle) has duly blocked the undue obstinacy (of the hearers), and then gives the solution itself. What is it? "If God, desiring to show wrath and show His might, with great patience spared the vessels of wrath ready for destruction, that together He might manifest the riches of His glory over the vessels of mercy which He had prepared for glory, over us, whom He had called not only from the Jews, but also from the Gentiles" (Rom. 9:22-24). The meaning of these words is this: Pharaoh was a vessel of wrath, that is, a man who, by his hardness of heart, inflamed the wrath of God; having repeatedly experienced God's long-suffering, he did not become better, but remained incorrigible. Therefore (the Apostle) called him not only a vessel of wrath, but also perfect unto destruction, that is, ready for destruction, and, of course, of himself and of his own free will. As God left nothing that led to his correction, so he himself did not leave anything that served to destroy him and deprive him of excuse. But, nevertheless, God, knowing this, endured everything with much patience, desiring to bring him to repentance, since if He had not wanted this, He would not have endured so long. And since Pharaoh did not want to use (God's) patience for repentance, but prepared himself for wrath, (God) used it to correct others, so that by means of his punishment he might make others more zealous and show his power. And that God wants to manifest His power not in punishments, but in other things - in good deeds and mercies - this (the Apostle) has constantly affirmed above. If Paul does not want to show his power in this, because he says: "Not that we might appear what we ought to be; but that ye should do good" (2 Cor. 13:7), then God is much more so. But since (God) first suffered long, in order to bring (Pharaoh) to repentance, and he did not repent, He endured him for a long time, in order to show both His goodness and His power, lest he should in any way be willing to make use of this great patience. And just as by punishing (Pharaoh), who remained incorrigible, (God) showed His power, so by having mercy on many great but repentant sinners, He showed His love for mankind.

9. But (the apostle) did not call it love for mankind, but glory, showing that this is primarily the glory of God, and that God cared for it more than anything else. But when he says, "which he hath prepared for glory," he expresses that not all things come from God alone, for if this were so, there would be nothing to hinder all from being saved. At the same time, (the Apostle) again shows the foreknowledge of God and abolishes the distinction between Jews and Gentiles. And from here again he derives a considerable justification for his words. Not only did some of the Jews perish and others were saved, but the same thing happened to the Gentiles, which is why (Paul) did not say, "All the Gentiles," but "of the Gentiles," and not (said), "All the Jews," but "of the Jews." As Pharaoh became a vessel of wrath through his own iniquity, so those who were saved became a vessel of mercy through their piety. And although the greater part belongs to God, nevertheless we also contribute something small of ourselves. Therefore (the Apostle) did not say, "vessels of merit," or, "vessels of boldness," but, "vessels of mercy," showing that all things belong to God. Likewise, the words, "not from him that willeth, nor from him that striveth," though spoken in contrast, are not in any way difficult, as spoken in the person of Paul himself. When he says: "Not from him who wills, nor from him who strives," he does not thereby destroy freedom, but shows that not everything belongs to man, but, on the contrary, he needs grace from above. One must both desire and perform feats, but one must rely not on one's own feats, but on God's love for mankind, as in another place (the Apostle) said: "Not I, however, but the grace of God, which is with me" (1 Cor. 15:10). And He said well, "Which He has prepared for glory." Since the Jews reproached (the Christians) with the fact that they were saved by grace, and thought thereby to shame them, (Paul) completely eliminates such a thought. If the work of salvation brought glory to God, then much more so to those through whom God was glorified. Notice, then, the good sense and ineffable wisdom (of the Apostle). Speaking of punishments, he might have given not Pharaoh as an example, but those who had sinned among the Jews, and made his speech clearer, proved that even where there were the same fathers and the same sins, some perished and others were pardoned, and persuaded them no longer to be perplexed that some of the Gentiles were saved, while the Jews perished. But (the Apostle), in order not to make his speech disagreeable, not to be forced to call the Jews vessels of wrath, presents the barbarian as an example of punishment, and borrows examples of the pardoned from the Jewish people. And although (the Apostle) sufficiently justifies God, Who, knowing full well that (Pharaoh) had prepared Himself for a vessel of wrath, used everything on His part - waiting, longsuffering, and not just longsuffering, but great longsuffering, yet He did not want to say that (God) did the same with the Jews. Why then are some vessels of wrath, and others vessels of mercy? Of his own free will. But God, in His immeasurable goodness, shows mercy to both. He had mercy not only on those who were being saved, but also on Pharaoh as much as he could, and both enjoyed the same long-suffering. And if (Pharaoh) was not saved, it was completely contrary to the will of God, since on the part of God (Pharaoh) had nothing less than those saved. And so, (the apostle), having presented the solution of the question on the basis of works, for the greater certainty of what has been said, he also cites the words of the prophets, who foretold the same. And Hosea, he says, wrote about it long ago: "I will not call my people my people, nor my beloved my beloved" (Rom. 9:25; cf. Hosea 2:23). Lest it be said, "Thou hast led us astray," in saying this, he called Hosea as a witness, who cries out and says, "I will not call My people My people." Who were these - "not My people"? Obviously, pagans. Who is not "beloved"? Again, they are the same. Yet it is said of them that they will be the people, the beloved, and the sons of God. "There they shall be called the sons of the living God," continues (the Apostle) (Rom. 9:26). If it is said that this is said of those who believe from among the Jews, then our interpretation will also be appropriate. If such a change occurred in those who, after many beneficences, proved ungrateful and alien, lost even that which made them a people, what could hinder the calling and honoring for obedience of the same favors to those who were alienated not after they were received, but were strangers from the beginning? (The Apostle) is not content with referring to Hosea, but after him he quotes the words of Isaiah, who speaks in agreement with Hosea. "Isaiah," continues (Paul), "declares about Israel" (Rom. 9:27), that is, boldly and without hiding, he declares. Why, then, do you accuse us, when even the prophets proclaim the same thing louder than the trumpet? What then does Isaiah cry out? "Though you have a people, O Israel, as much as the sand of the sea, only a remnant thereof shall be converted" (Isa. 10:22). Do you see that, according to Isaiah, not all will be saved, but only those who are worthy of salvation? I am not afraid of the multitude, says (God), and I am not afraid of the generation that has multiplied so much, but I save only those who prove worthy of it. And not only did (the prophet) mention the sand of the sea, but also reminds them of the Old Testament promise, which they had become unworthy. Why, then, do you worry about saying that the promise is broken, when all the prophets declare that not all are saved? Then he speaks about the image of salvation. Do you notice the accuracy of the prophet and the prudence of the apostle, who gives the most appropriate testimony? It not only shows that not all will be saved, but some, but also adds how they will be saved. How will they be saved, and how will God grant them blessings? "The deed is finished, and will soon decide in righteousness," says (the prophet), "the decisive deed will be done by the Lord on earth" (Rom. 9:28, cf. Isa. 10:23). This means the following: one should not go far, work and tire oneself with the deeds of the law, on the contrary, salvation will be accomplished in a very brief way. Such is faith: it contains salvation in brief words. "For if thou wilt confess with thy mouth that Jesus is Lord," says (the Apostle), "and believe in thy heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved" (Rom. 10:9).