Rescuing Romans From The Reformers

[phatcatholic]

[b][size=3]Rescuing Romans from the Reformers[/size][/b]
[url="http://web.archive.org/web/20031222044338/http://www.lumengentleman.com/content.asp?file=rescuing_romans"]http://web.archive.org/web/20031222044338/...rescuing_romans[/url]
[i]Jacob Michael[/i] -- [i][b][url="http://www.lumengentleman.com/index.asp"]LumenGentleman Apologetics[/url][/b][/i]

In my former life as a Protestant of the Calvinist strain, and also in my current dealings with Protestants, it seems that the single most abused book of the bible which is pressed into service to defend Reformed doctrine is the book of Romans. From Faith Alone to the Total Depravity of Man, it seems that no other book so easily lends itself to twisting and distortion by those who have chosen to wrench the Sacred Scripture from the interpretive tradition of the Catholic Church. It was the book of Romans that inspired Luther to initiate a world-wide rebellion against Christ's Holy Catholic Church, and it is this same book, with it's summary points compiled and immortalized on a thousand "Romans Road" cards and tracts, that continues to lure the faithful out of the Catholic Church and into the world of Protestant Anarchy.

I hope, then, to address some of the more frequently-used passages of this most complex and difficult to understand epistle, in order that the faithful may have some measure of protection against the "unlearned and unstable" (2 Pet. 3:16), who "distort, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction," the letter of St. Paul to the Romans.

Before I dive into this most daunting task, I want to establish a basic premise: St. Paul never cites Old Testament texts out of context. Perhaps more than any other New Testament writer, St. Paul constructs extremely elaborate and complex arguments by using Old Testament texts as "teasers," one or two-line phrases that draw on an already established and common shared tradition. His use of Old Testament texts is meant to evoke in the minds of his original readers the context of entire chapters, entire books, the context of history, and the places and events that serve as background to the texts he chooses. Because so many of us today are so poorly versed in the Old Testament, most, if not all, of these "intertextual echoes" fly right over our heads, much to our own shame. As a consequence, we only read St. Paul "on the surface," and often come away with an understanding of the text that is the polar opposite of what St. Paul meant. Only when we familiarize ourselves with the Old Testament stories, law, poetry, and prophecy, will we be able to understand St. Paul correctly. Perhaps, then, this little article will serve as a tantalizing taste of what kind of gold can be found in St. Paul as a result of a little hard study in the Old Testament. I am deeply indebted to Dr. Scott Hahn, Dr. Don Garlington, and Richard B. Hayes for serving as my first "tour guides" through the epistles of St. Paul, and for showing to me the hidden gold mines that exist in an Old Testament-based reading of St. Paul.

[b]There is No One Righteous [/b][list]"As it is written: There is not any man just. There is none that understandeth: there is none that seeketh after God. All have turned out of the way: they are become unprofitable together: there is none that doth good, there is not so much as one. Their throat is an open sepulchre: with their tongues they have dealt deceitfully. The venom of asps is under their lips. Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery in their ways: And the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes." (Rom. 3:10-18)
[/list]These verses are twisted by Reformers to support their doctrine that Man is totally depraved, incapable and uninterested in seeking after God. They assert that Man is nothing but evil, all the time, and that apart from God's regenerating action, no one can repent and accept God's gift of salvation. They claim that the Blessed Virgin's Immaculate Conception is proven false by means of these verses.

On the surface, this seems to be the case. After all, the text plainly says that "there is not any man just... none that seeketh after God." Who could disagree that St. Paul is truly making the case for humanity's utter corruption?

Too often, however, these verses are read in isolation from the verse which immediately precedes them. Let us look at Romans 3:9 to see if, in fact, St. Paul is even attempting to prove such a hypothesis:[list]"What then? Do we excel them? No, not so. For we have charged both Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin."
[/list]The waters become a bit clearer now, don't they? St. Paul is not interested in proving Man's total inability to do good here, but, arguing as he is against the Judaizers, who mistakenly believe that, because of their special status as the nation that received the Law directly from God's mouth, they are members of God's elite, wholly blameless and undefiled - unlike the Gentile dogs - he is very much interested in proving that, when it comes to sin, Jews are no better off than Gentiles. The premise is clearly stated: "both Jews and Greeks... are all under sin." This premise builds upon a broader assertion a few verses earlier, that God is just in His judgments, and that the proper attitude of men towards God is that of humility and repentence: "But God is true and every man a liar, as it is written: That thou mayest be justified in thy words and mayest overcome when thou art judged. [Ps. 51:4]" (vs. 4) What text(s) does St. Paul turn to in order to prove his point? In this particular case, St. Paul proves his point irrefutably by rapidly firing fragments from some six Psalms, and one from Isaiah. Here are the passages, in their original context:[list]"The fool hath said in his heart: There is no God. They are corrupt, and are become abominable in their ways: there is none that doth good, no not one. The Lord hath looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there be any that understand and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are become unprofitable together: there is none that doth good: no not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they acted deceitfully: the poison of asps is under their lips. Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; their feet are swift to shed blood. Destruction and unhappiness in their ways; and the way of peace they have not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes. Shall not all they know that work iniquity, who devour my people as they eat bread? They have not called upon the Lord: there have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear. For the Lord is in the just generation: you have confounded the counsel of the poor man; but the Lord is his hope." (Ps. 14:1-6)

"They are corrupted, and become abominable in iniquities: there is none that doth good. God looked down from heaven on the children of men: to see if there were any that did understand, or did seek God. All have gone aside, they are become unprofitable toegther, there is none that doth good, no not one. Shall not all the workers of iniquity know, who eat up my people as they eat bread? They have not called upon God: there have they trembled for fear, where there was no fear. For God hath scattered the bones of them that please men: they have been confounded, because God hath despised them. Who will give out of Sion the salvation of Israel? when God shall bring back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad." (Ps. 53:1-6)

"In the morning I will stand before thee, and I will see: because thou art not a God that willest iniquity. Neither shall the wicked dwell near thee: nor shall the unjust abide before thy eyes. Thou hatest all the workers of iniquity: thou wilt destroy all that speak a lie. The bloody and the deceitful man the Lord will abhor. But as for me in the multitude of thy mercy, I will come into thy house; I will worship towards thy holy temple, in thy fear. Conduct me, O Lord, in thy justice: because of my enemies, direct my way in thy sight. For there is no truth in their mouth: their heart is vain. Their throat is an open sepulchre: they dealt deceitfully with their tongues: judge them, O God. Let them fall from their devices: according to the multitude of their wickednesses cast them out: for they have provoked thee, O Lord." (Ps. 5:4-10)

"Deliver me, O Lord, from the evil man: rescue me from the unjust man. Who have devised iniquities in their hearts: all the day long they designed battles. They have sharpened their tongues like a serpent: the venom of asps is under their lips. Keep me, O Lord, from the hand of the wicked: and from unjust men deliver me. Who have proposed to supplant my steps: The proud have hidden a net for me. And they have stretched out cords for a snare: they have laid for me a stumblingblock by the wayside. I said to the Lord: Thou art my God: hear, O Lord, the voice of my supplication. O Lord, Lord, the strength of my salvation: thou hast overshadowed my head in the day of battle. Give me not up, O Lord, from my desire to the wicked: they have plotted against me; do not thou forsake me, lest they should triumph. The head of them compassing me about: the labour of their lips shall overwhelm them. Burning coals shall fall upon them; thou wilt cast them down into the fire: in miseries they shall not be able to stand. A man full of tongue shall not be established in the earth: evil shall catch the unjust man unto destruction. I know that the Lord will do justice to the needy, and will revenge the poor. But as for the just, they shall give glory to thy name: and the upright shall dwell with thy countenance." (Ps. 140:1-12)

"The sinner hath provoked the Lord, according to the multitude of his wrath, he will not seek him: God is not before his eyes: his ways are filthy at all times. Thy judgments are removed form his sight: he shall rule over all his enemies. For he hath said in his heart: I shall not be moved from generation to generation, and shall be without evil. His mouth is full of cursing, and of bitterness, and of deciet: under his tongue are labour and sorrow. He sitteth in ambush with the rich, in private places, that he may kill the innocent. His eyes are upon the poor man: he lieth in wait, in secret, like a lion in his den. He lieth in ambush, that he may catch the poor man: so catch the poor, whilst he draweth him to him. In his net he will bring him down, he will crouch and fall, when he shall have power over the poor. For he hath said in his heart: God hath forgotten, he hath turned away his face, not to see to the end. Arise, O Lord God, let thy hand be exalted: forget not the poor." (Ps. 10:3-12)

"Behold the hand of the Lord is not shortened that it cannot save, neither is his ear heavy that it cannot hear. But your iniquities have divided between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you that he should not hear. For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity: your lips have spoken lies, and your tongue uttereth iniquity. There is none that calleth upon justice, neither is there any one that judgeth truly: but they trust in a mere nothing, and speak vanities: they have conceived labour, and brought forth iniquity. They have broken the eggs of asps, and have woven the webs of spiders: he that shall eat of their eggs, shall die: and that which is brought out, shall be hatched into a basilisk. Their webs shall not be for clothing, neither shall they cover themselves with their works: their works are unprofitable works, and the work of iniquity is in their hands. Their feet run to evil, and make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are unprofitable thoughts: wasting and destruction are in their ways. They have not known the way of peace, and there is no judgment in their steps: their paths are become crooked to them, every one that treadeth in them knoweth no peace. Therefore is judgment far from us, and justice shall not overtake us. We looked for light, and behold darkness: brightness, and we have walked in the dark... And there shall come a redeemer to Sion, and to them that return from iniquity in Jacob, saith the Lord. This is my covenant with them, saith the Lord: My spirit that is in thee, and my words that I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever. (Is. 59:1-9, 20-21)

"The unjust hath said within himself, that he would sin: there is no fear of God before his eyes. For in his sight he hath done deceitfully, that his iniquity may be found unto hatred. The words of his mouth are iniquity and guile: he would not understand that he might do well. He hath devised iniquity on his bed, he hath set himself on every way that is not good: but evil he hath not hated. O Lord, thy mercy is in heaven, and thy truth reacheth even to the clouds. Thy justice is as the mountains of God, thy judgments are a great deep. Men and beasts thou wilt preserve, O Lord: O how hast thou multiplied thy mercy, O God! But the children of men shall put their trust under the covert of thy wings. They shall be inebriated with the plenty of thy house; and thou shalt make them drink of the torrent of thy pleasure. For with thee is the fountain of life; and in thy light we shall see light. Extend thy mercy to them that know thee, and thy justice to them that are right in heart." (Ps. 36:1-10)
[/list]In this devastating and unrelenting litany of national shame, St. Paul has forcefully proved his case. In the case of the Psalms, St. Paul reminds his Jewish readers of David's own plight against "wicked men." But who, in David's case, were the "wicked men?" Certainly not the Gentiles, for David had defeated them and brought them into submission before he ascended to the throne in Jerusalem. Who was David on the run from during most of his life? King Saul, and later, his own son, Absalom. These men, along with their fellow Jewish cronies, gave David no end of persecution. But these were David's own Jewish compatriots! So what does it say about the Jews when David uses such language about his own national family?

In the case of Isaiah, it is clear that he is speaking to the Jews in the midst of their corruption, for he predicts their ultimate judgment and future restoration by means of a new covenant. Again, the words Isaiah uses to describe the Jews before their exile are most damning.

St. Paul proves his premise beyond any shadow of a doubt: the Jews have a history of sin and wickedness, so they are no better than the Gentile nations at whom they stare down their hypocritical noses. But what about the Reformers' premise? Is is decidedly destroyed when one considers that in almost every Psalm quoted, there is some mention of "the just," "the righteous," "them that are right in heart," and so on. How can the Psalmist be saying that there is literally no one who is righteous, who seeks after God, when he then goes on to use phrases like, "But as for the just, they shall give glory to thy name: and the upright shall dwell with thy countenance," and "For the Lord is in the just generation?" The Reformer must concede that he has utterly missed the point of St. Paul's argument, and that he has done what St. Paul would never do: wrenched Old Testament texts out of context.

[b]By Faith Alone?[/b][list]"For we account a man to be justified by faith, without the works of the law. Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? yes, of the Gentiles also. For it is one God that justifieth circumcision by faith and uncircumcision through faith. Do we then, destroy the law through faith? God forbid! But we establish the law. What shall we say then that Abraham hath found, who is our father according to the flesh? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God: and it was reputed to him unto justice. Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned according to grace but according to debt. But to him that worketh not, yet believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reputed to justice, according to the purpose of the grace of God. As David also termeth the blessedness of a man to whom God reputeth justice without works: Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven: and Blessed is the man to whom the Lord hath not imputed sin." (Rom. 3:28-4:8)
[/list]This set of verses has been thrown out in debates ad infinitum when the Reformer is arguing (usually with a Catholic) against a salvation that includes works. Works are important, they will say, and must follow as the proper fruit of true faith, but they do not affect our standing before God. As proof of this, inevitably Romans 3 and 4 will be cited, with special emphasis on the case of Abraham and David, who are said to have had righteousness "reputed," and sin not "imputed." These are legal terms, so goes the argument, and so justification is something that is credited to our "account", externally, though we ourselves remain essentially impure in our soul. It is Christ's righteousness that is credited to us, and it so covers us over that God no longer sees our inner impurity, but only sees the external covering of Christ.

Once again, we must ask if this is really what St. Paul is concerned with in this epistle. A brief glance at the first few verses shows that such is apparently not what he is preoccupied with: "Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles?... For it is one God that justifieth circumcision by faith and uncircumcision through faith." Here, then, is St. Paul's premise: the Jewish Law, of which circumcision was the initiating rite, does not give the Jews an exclusive claim to the promise of Abraham, for both Jews and Gentiles are made heirs, not by circumcision, but by faith. Hence, St. Paul turns almost immediately to the example of Abraham, which is certainly logical, since the Law (and indirectly, circumcision, which St. Paul uses as a prime example of "works of the Law") is the topic under question, and it was to Abraham that circumcision was first given.[list]"Now when these things were done, the word of the Lord came to Abram by a vision, saying: Fear not, Abram, I am thy protector, and thy reward exceeding great. And Abram said: Lord God, what wilt thou give me? I shall go without children: and the son of the steward of my house is this Damascus Eliezer. And Abram added: But to me thou hast not given seed: and lo my servant born in my house, shall be my heir. And immediately the word of the Lord came to him, saying : He shall not be thy heir: but he that shall come out of thy bowels, him shalt thou have for thy heir. And he brought him forth abroad, and said to him: Look up to heaven and number the stars if thou canst. And he said to him: So shall thy seed be. Abram believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice." (Gen. 15:1-6)
[/list]Why does St. Paul choose to cite from this text? No question about it, he cites from this example because of its chronological placement in the story of Abraham's life. The event St. Paul refers to, in which Abraham is declared righteous by God because he believed, takes place years before this event:[list]"And after he began to be ninety and nine years old, the Lord appeared to him: and said unto him: I am the Almighty God: walk before me, and be perfect. And I will make my covenant between me and thee: and I will multiply thee exceedingly. Abram fell flat on his face. And God said to him: I am, and my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name be called any more Abram: but thou shalt be called Abraham: because I have made thee a father of many nations. And I will make thee increase exceedingly, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and between thy seed after thee in their generations, by a perpetual covenant: to be a God to thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give to thee, and to thy seed, the land of thy sojournment, all the land of Chanaan, for a perpetual possession, and I will be their God. Again God said to Abraham: And thou therefore shalt keep my covenant, and thy seed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant which you shall observe between me and you, and thy seed after thee: All the male kind of you shall be circumcised. And you shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, that it may be for a sign of the covenant between me and you." (Gen. 17:1-11)
[/list]Do you see the crushing blow that is dealt to the Circumcision Party in this argument? Abraham was declared righteous because of his faith many years before he received the sign of circumcision, which the Circumcision Party claimed was so essential to fulfilling the Law. Apparently, the Judaizers had forgotten that Abraham was given circumcision precisely because he had tried to take matters into his own hands, forcing the promise of God to give him a son by sleeping with Hagar, rather than trusting in faith. By casually dropping one key passage on the table, St. Paul evokes the whole story of Abraham, and diffuses his opponents' argument. He then cites from the example of David again:[list]"Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord hath not imputed sin, and in whose spirit there is no guile. Because I was silent my bones grew old; whilst I cried out all the day long. For day and night thy hand was heavy upon me: I am turned in my anguish, whilst the thorn is fastened. I have acknowledged my sin to thee, and my injustice I have not concealed. I said I will confess against my self my injustice to the Lord: and thou hast forgiven the wickedness of my sin." (Ps. 32:1-5)
[/list]This passage is taken from the companion to Psalm 51, which St. Paul had just cited from in Chapter 3. It is a penitential Psalm, just like Psalm 51, and was written after David's sin of adultery and murder. This text plays a double-role for St. Paul, in this way: it serves as a link to Genesis 15:6 by way of the common word "imputed" (or "reckoned"), and thus makes David to offer a kind of inspired commentary on Abraham's blessing, and it also reinforces the earlier assertion that the Jews and Gentiles alike are under the power of sin. Because this is a penitential Psalm that cannot but remind the Jewish readers of David's grievous sin with Bathsheba, the Jew is forced to admit that, though he had the Law, even David was still subject to his sinful flesh. Therefore, both he and Abraham become examples of men who were declared righteous in spite of their claim to the Jewish Law.

Now then, what about the Reformer's use of this passage to prove that Man is justified apart from works, in a forensic, declarative manner? Once again, he is forced to admit a bit of misuse of these Old Testament texts, for we read:[list]"By faith he that is called Abraham obeyed to go out into a place which he was to receive for an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing whither he went." (Heb. 11:8)

"And the Lord said to Abram: Go forth out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and out of thy father's house, and come into the land which I shall shew thee. And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and magnify thy name, and thou shalt be blessed. I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee, and in thee shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. So Abram went out as the Lord had commanded him, and Lot went with him: Abram was seventy-five years old when he went forth from Haran." (Gen. 12:1-4)
[/list]The issue of chronology which played so well into St. Paul's hands is the same issue which confounds and frustrates the Reformer. If, as the Reformer claims, St. Paul is citing from Genesis 15:6 to show when Abraham was first "saved" by God, then he must answer the fact that Genesis 15 takes place many, many years after Genesis 12, in which account Abram obeys God and sets out on a journey to an unknown land. The inspired commentary in Hebrews informs us that this was, in fact, an act of faith and obedience on the part of Abram. Given that faith and obedience are the two key ingredients in the work of salvation, how can the Reformer posit that Abraham was not justified until Genesis 15:6, when clearly, he had faith in God and obeyed in Genesis 12? The reality is that Abraham was "saved" no later than Genesis 12, when he showed his faith by his obedience (a combination that meets the criteria for salvation according to both St. Paul and St. James), and he was further justified in Genesis 15:6 for an additional act of faith. Beyond this, St. James says, "Was not Abraham our father justified by works, offering up Isaac his son upon the altar," referring to Genesis 22, which comes after Genesis 15:6, thus giving us a total of three times in Scripture where Abraham is justified. Certainly, this does not fit well into the Reformed system, wherein a man is justified once, and never again after that.

[b]Eternally Secure [/b][list]"What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who is against us? He that spared not even his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how hath he not also, with him, given us all things? Who shall accuse against the elect of God? God is he that justifieth: Who is he that shall condemn? Christ Jesus that died: yea that is risen also again, who is at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. Who then shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation? Or distress? Or famine? Or nakedness? Or danger? Or persecution? Or the sword? (As it is written: For thy sake, we are put to death all the day long. We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.) But in all these things we overcome, because of him that hath loved us. For I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor might, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Rom. 8:31-39)
[/list]Whenever a Catholic is faced with the accusation that the Holy Church does not give Her members any assurance of salvation, this text is almost inevitably brought into the discussion, right after 1 John 5:13, to prove how far from "biblical Christianity" Rome has fallen. This set of verses is often interpreted to mean that nothing we do, no sin that we commit, no matter how great, could separate us from the love of God. After all, doesn't St. Paul say that nothing in heaven or on earth will be able to separate us from God? With this interpretation, however, comes the difficulty of making sense out of St. Paul's use of Psalm 44. Why does he call upon this text in the middle of his argument?

First, we must take a closer look at the list of things that St. Paul says can not separate us from the love of God: tribulation, distress, famine, nakedness, danger, persecution, the sword, death, life, angels, principalities, powers, present things, and future things. All of these are things which are external to us, and this particular catalog is almost the exact opposite of the catalog given in 1 Cor. 6:[list]"Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: Neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers: Nor the effeminate nor liers with mankind nor thieves nor covetous nor drunkards nor railers nor extortioners shall possess the kingdom of God." (1 Cor. 6:9-10)
[/list]In this list, we are shown the things that do separate us from God and from His kingdom: fornication, idolatry, adultery, homosexuality, lying, theft, covetousness, drunkeness, etc. What, then, is the premise that St. Paul is arguing for in Romans 8? Once again, we must travel back in the chapter to see where his argument is leading:[list]"For whosoever are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For you have not received the spirit of bondage again in fear: but you have received the spirit of adoption of sons, whereby we cry: Abba (Father). For the Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit that we are the sons of God. And if sons, heirs also; heirs indeed of God and joint heirs with Christ: yet so, if we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified with him. For I reckon that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come that shall be revealed in us." (Rom. 8:14-18)
[/list]To the Jewish mind, temporal blessings (children, wealth, land, etc.) were the sign that one was in good standing with God, while suffering was a sign of God's judgment and displeasure. Is this not the problem that Job seeks to address and make sense of? Indeed, for some 40 chapters, Job and his friends attempt to answer the age-old question of why bad things happen to good people. St. Paul appears to be bringing forth a revolutionary idea, the idea that it is precisely our sufferings which unite us with Christ, who himself was "made perfect through suffering." (Heb. 5:8-9) St. Paul says that we are heirs with Christ, "if we suffer with him." What a theological novelty! Or is it? St. Paul turns to Psalm 44, once again with the intention of evoking the entire context and meaning of the Psalm, to show that suffering for God is nothing new at all:[list]"In God shall we glory all the day long: and in thy name we will give praise for ever. But now thou hast cast us off, and put us to shame: and thou , O God, wilt not go out with our armies. Thou hast made us turn our back to our enemies: and they that hated us plundered for themselves. Thou hast given us up like sheep to be eaten: thou hast scattered us among the nations. Thou hast sold thy people for no price: and there was no reckoning in the exchange of them. Thou hast made us a reproach to our neighbours, a scoff and derision to them that are round about us. Thou hast made us a byword among the Gentiles: a shaking of the head among the people. All the day long my shame is before me: and the confusion of my face hath covered me, At the voice of him that reproacheth and detracteth me: at the face of the enemy and persecutor. All these things have come upon us, yet we have not forgotten thee: and we have not done wickedly in thy covenant. And our heart hath not turned back: neither hast thou turned aside our steps from thy way. For thou hast humbled us in the place of affliction: and the shadow of death hath covered us. If we have forgotten the name of our God, and if we have spread forth our hands to a strange god: Shall not God search out these things: for he knoweth the secrets of the heart. Because for thy sake we are killed all the day long: we are counted as sheep for the slaughter. Arise, why sleepest thou, O Lord? arise, and cast us not off to the end." (Ps. 44:8-23)
[/list]The complaint of the Psalmist here is most certainly the very objection that St. Paul's readers in Rome would raise. Notice that the Psalmist says, "we have not forgotten thee, and we have not done wickedly in thy covenant." Yet, regardless of having been faithful to the covenant, "for thy sake we are... counted as sheep for the slaughter." St. Paul, in quoting this Psalm, points to Israel as a prefiguration of the early Church to which he is writing. This question of God's faithfulness to His people Israel is something which St. Paul continues to address all the way through chapter 11, where he echoes verse 23 of this Psalm: "I say then: Hath God cast away his people? God forbid!" (11:1) The answer to this question finds an initial answer in Rom. 8:33: "Who shall accuse against the elect of God? God is he that justifieth." This verse echoes back to the prophecy of Isaiah:[list]"The Lord God is my helper, therefore am I not confounded: therefore have I set my face as a most hard rock, and I know that I shall not be confounded. He is near that justifieth me, who will contend with me? let us stand together, who is my adversary? let him come near to me. Behold the Lord God is my helper: who is he that shall condemn me? Lo, they shall all be destroyed as a garment, the moth shall eat them up." (Is. 50:7-9)
[/list]By means of these two Old Testament allusions, St. Paul both proclaims, along with Isaiah, his firm trust in God's faithfulness, and reminds his readers that their suffering is not a punishment for unfaithfulness, but is precisely because of their faithfulness. His reference to Psalm 44, "we are counted as sheep for the slaughter," cannot but bring to his readers' minds another Faithful Son of God who was "counted as sheep for the slaughter":[list]"He was offered because it was his own will, and he opened not his mouth: he shall be led as a sheep to the slaughter, and shall be dumb as a lamb before his shearer, and he shall not open his mouth. He was taken away from distress, and from judgment: who shall declare his generation? because he is cut off out of the land of the living: for the wickedness of my people have I struck him. And he shall give the ungodly for his burial, and the rich for his death: because he hath done no iniquity, neither was there deceit in his mouth." (Is. 53:7-9)
[/list]Jesus Christ himself, "because he hath done no iniquity, neither was there deceit in his mouth," was "led as a sheep to the slaughter." Yet, in the end, God justified His beloved Son by raising him from the dead, and so, St. Paul reminds his readers that we too, if we suffer as slaughtered sheep, like Jesus suffered as a slaughtered sheep, then we too will be justified and vindicated by God for our faithfulness. This is undoubtedly what St. Paul intends when he quotes from Psalm 44, the last verse of which reads:[list]"Arise, O Lord, help us and redeem us for thy name's sake."
[/list]God will vindicate His own name by redeeming those who are faithful to Him, even though they may suffer greatly for a while, as Jesus did, as the Psalmist did, and as the early Church did. It is this union with Christ's suffering ("he was... a sheep to the slaughter," and "we are counted as sheep for the slaughter") that will ultimately cause us to reap a harvest of glory, which ties back into St. Paul's original point in vs. 17: "we are... joint heirs with Christ: yet so, if we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified with him."

Once again we see that St. Paul has masterfully proved the point he was trying to make, while leaving the Reformer, who wishes to twist these passages into a prooftext for eternal security, with no ground to stand on. Indeed, the Reformer would take issue with St. Paul's very Catholic doctrine of redemptive suffering, without which we cannot be heirs of the kingdom. Rather, too many modern-day Evangelicals have fallen into the exact Jewish mindset that St. Paul is trying to correct in these verses, namely, that the gospel is the good news of health, wealth, and prosperity. There is hardly an Evangelical church around in our age that proclaims the truths which St. Paul expresses here: true Christians are expected to suffer in union with Christ, and to be perfected through suffering just as Christ was, so that they may obtain eternal glory just as Christ did.

[b]The Arbitrary Deity [/b][list]"For the scripture saith to Pharaoh: To this purpose have I raised thee, that I may shew my power in thee and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore he hath mercy on whom he will. And whom he will, he hardeneth. Thou wilt say therefore to me: Why doth he then find fault? For who resisteth his will? O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it: Why hast thou made me thus?" (Rom. 9:17-20)
[/list]This chapter of Romans is, without question, one of the most difficult chapters to understand in all of St. Paul's letters. His unrelenting use of Old Testament texts throughout this chapter (both explicit and, perhaps more frustrating, implicit) must be followed carefully in order to hear the complex argument that he is making. Most people who read Romans 9 miss the critical intertextual echoes of Old Testament stories, and of those who do hear the echoes, many do not bother to investigate the source to examine the full context, as I so very often failed to do in times past. Failure to do these things almost always leads, especially in the case of Romans 9, to an understanding of St. Paul that is diametrically opposed to his intended meaning.

The above passage is a favorite prooftext for Calvinist Reformers to support their view that God is arbitrary in His sovereign choice of who will and who will not be saved, and of who will and who will not be hardened. They posit the view that God predestines certain select souls to eternal salvation, while the rest are predestined to have their hearts hardened, and to suffer eternal damnation. They further assert that, because of Original Sin, Man has no free will, and is thus incapable of repenting unless God softens his heart, which, if God has not sovereignly chosen to do, leaves Man with no recourse. When the obvious question is raised of how a just God can condemn a man who never really had a chance, incapable as he is of repenting unless God should allow him to do so, the Calvinist Reformer will triumphantly point out that St. Paul has anticipated that very question, and the answer is to be found in Rom. 9:20: "O man, who are thou that repliest against God?" All impertinent questioning must be silenced in the presence of an all-sovereign God who can and will do what He wants, when He wants.

This line of reasoning frustrated me to no end in years past, for while the plain meaning of the text seemed clear, this depiction of God simply didn't seem to fit in with what I knew to be true from Scripture: that God is just, that God is "rich in mercy" (Eph. 2:4), that God is "slow to anger" (Ex. 34:6), and that God "desires all men to be saved." (1 Tim. 2:4) I sought high and low for an answer to the question of how a just and merciful God could beaver dam a soul to Hell for not repenting, when all the while the only way the soul could repent was if God empowered him to do so, but time and time again, I found myself running into the brick wall of St. Paul's seemingly cop-out reponse: "O man, who art thou that repliest against God?" Was this really the only answer Scripture had to offer, this answer which was really no answer at all? Eventually, I was driven to the only plausible conclusion in my mind, and that was that St. Paul was merely spouting his own fallible opinion, which obviously failed to take into account that God is elsewhere in Scripture said to be "gracious" and "compassionate."

Once I had thrown out the doctrine of Scripture's infallibility, it was a long road to perdition, and an even longer road back to the truth, the traveling of which spanned several years for me, and the end of which led me ultimately to the Catholic Church. It wasn't until I was safely inside the arms of Mother Church, trusting once again by faith that the Sacred Scripture was inspired, yet still puzzling over Romans 9 (I studiously avoided even reading the chapter, lest I be thrown into confusion again), that I finally heard a tape by Dr. Scott Hahn on the book of Romans. I am forever indebted to him for preserving my sanity! Thus, in order to perhaps prevent some other poor soul from having to undergo the same tribulation, I will offer the following explanation.

It is necessary for us to begin at the very beginning of the chapter, in order to pick up on St. Paul's argument and follow it through to the more difficult verses quoted above. By way of introduction, it will serve us well to remember the general theme of Romans, that is, that St. Paul wishes to establish, 1) that the Jewish Law no longer set Israel apart as God's "only beloved," leaving the Gentiles with no hope, and 2) that God's inclusion of the Gentiles in the plan of salvation by faith, while the majority of Jews continue to miss the mark by trying to obligate God with works of their own doing, does not amount to His rejecting His chosen people. He seeks to show that God's dealings with His people have not changed throughout their history, and that men have been always declared righteous by God, not for relying on their own strength and mighty works, but by humbling themselves and obeying God by faith. With that in mind, we turn to Romans 9:[list]"I speak the truth in Christ: I lie not, my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost: That I have great sadness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I wished myself to be an anathema from Christ, for my brethren: who are my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites: to whom belongeth the adoption as of children and the glory and the testament and the giving of the law and the service of God and the promises: Whose are the fathers and of whom is Christ, according to the flesh, who is over all things, God blessed for ever. Amen." (Rom. 9:1-5)
[/list]St. Paul's use of the phrase, "For I wished myself to be an anathema from Christ, for my brethren," echoes back to Moses, who used those very same words of himself:[list]"And returning to the Lord, he said: I beseech thee: this people hath sinned a heinous sin, and they have made to themselves gods of gold: either forgive them this trespass, Or if thou do not, strike me out of the book that thou hast written." (Ex. 32:31-32)
[/list]The context of this citation is, of course, the "heinous sin" of the Golden Calf, in which Israel utterly rejected God and His chosen mediator, Moses, by making a false god out of gold and saying, "These are thy gods, O Israel, that have brought thee out of the land of Egypt." (Ex. 32:4) Why does St. Paul cite from this passage? I would suggest that he is drawing to the attention of his opponents (the Judaizers) that he has become a second Moses for them, because the sin of the people in Moses' day is much like the sin of the people in St. Paul's day. Namely, Israel in Moses' day rejected God and His mediator, much like the Jews in St. Paul's day had only recently rejected God and His mediator, Jesus, by handing him over to the Romans for crucifixion.

The sin of the Golden Calf triggered a period of 40 years wherein God punished the people, in the hopes that they would repent of their sin and turn back to God. The sin of the Jews in St. Paul's day also triggered a penitential period of 40 years, in which God gave the Jews a generation's time to repent before Rome finally descended upon Jerusalem (in 70 AD) to destroy it. Jesus himself spoke of this:[list]"And Jesus being come out of the temple, went away. And his disciples came to shew him the buildings of the temple. And he answering, said to them: Do you see all these things? Amen I say to you, there shall not be left here a stone upon a stone that shall not be destroyed... And you shall hear of wars and rumours of wars. See that ye be not troubled. For these things must come to pass: but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: And there shall be pestilences and famines and earthquakes in places... Then shall they deliver you up to be afflicted and shall put you to death: and you shall be hated by all nations for my name's sake... And many false prophets shall rise and shall seduce many. And because iniquity hath abounded, the charity of many shall grow cold... Then they that are in Judea, let them flee to the mountains... For there shall be then great tribulation, such as hath not been from the beginning of the world until now, neither shall be... For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect... Amen I say to you that this generation shall not pass till all these things be done." (Mt. 24:1-2, 6-7, 9, 11-12, 16, 21, 24, 34)
[/list]All of this is in the forefront of St. Paul's mind, as he tries desperately to make his fellow Jews understand how similar their situation is to the events surrounding the Israelites in the Exodus, and as he pleads with them to repent while there is still time.[list]"Not as though the word of God hath miscarried. For all are not Israelites that are of Israel. Neither are all they that are the seed of Abraham, children: but in Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is to say, not they that are the children of the flesh are the children of God: but they that are the children of the promise are accounted for the seed. For this is the word of promise: According to this time will I come. And Sara shall have a son." (Rom. 9:6-9)
[/list]St. Paul here anticipates the objection of his opponents: if God promised great blessings to the Jewish people through their forefather, Abraham, yet now there is a great possibility of their nation being judged and destroyed for rejecting and crucifying Christ, then God has lied. But no, says St. Paul, because "Israelites" are not restricted to those who are merely biologically Israelites, and the "children of Abraham" are not restricted to those who are biologically descended from Abraham. St. Paul hammers this point home by citing from Genesis again:[list]"And when Sara had seen the son of Hagar, the Egyptian, playing with Isaac, her son, she said to Abraham: Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with my son Isaac. Abraham took this grievously for his son. And God said to him: Let it not seem grievous to thee for the boy, and for thy bondwoman: in all that Sara hath said to thee, hearken to her voice: for in Isaac shall thy seed be called." (Gen. 21:9-12)
[/list]This is a masterful stroke on the part of St. Paul, for the event that provides the context of the verse he cites is the expulsion of Ishmael. Abraham had two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. One was the child of promise, and one was the child of the flesh. Ishmael was born as the result of Abraham taking Divine matters into his own hands, when he slept with Sara's maidservant, Hagar. This was not the child that God had promised Abraham, and thus, Ishmael remained a son of Abraham merely by natural descent. Isaac, on the other hand, was born as the result of a miraculous act of God, who revived Sara's "dead womb" so that she could bear Abraham a son. Thus, Isaac is both a natural son of Abraham and a supernatural son of the promise. In essence, St. Paul is saying, "Look, you think you're something special because you are biological sons of Abraham? Well, so was Ishmael, and he was disinherited." The conclusion of this argument, according to St. Paul, is clear: "Not they that are the children of the flesh are the children of God: but they that are the children of the promise are accounted for the seed."

There is another subtle argument being mounted here simultaneously, an argument which St. Paul will develop further as he moves along: he draws a distinction between the firstborn son (in this case, Ishmael), and the younger son (in this case, Isaac). Watch carefully as he continues to develop this theme:[list]"And not only she. But when Rebecca also had conceived at once of Isaac our father. For when the children were not yet born, nor had done any good or evil (that the purpose of God according to election might stand): Not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said to her: The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written: Jacob I have loved: but Esau I have hated." (Rom. 9:10-13)
[/list]St. Paul continues to develop his firstborn/secondborn distinction, this time referring to Esau (the older son) and Jacob (the younger son). An important concept is introduced here, something that also rebounds back to his previous example of Isaac and Ishmael: not of works, but of Him that calleth. Both Ishmael and Esau were firstborn sons, who, according to natural biology, would have been bigger, stronger, able to work harder. But God is not interested in the strength of our flesh, for the bigger and stronger we are on our own, the less likely we are to see our need for His life in us, and the more likely we are to become proud and boastful. Thus it is that both Isaac and Jacob, younger, weaker sons, are chosen by God to be blessed and to continue the genealogical line of God's promise (which ultimately ends in the birth of Christ). St. Paul has not yet snapped shut the trap that he is setting here, but in just a few verses, he will do just that.

What about that phrase, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated?" Many Reformers skim right over this explicit reference to the Old Testament, which forces them to do something St. Paul never does: prooftext. This citation, oddly enough, is not from Genesis, and does not refer to the individuals Jacob and Esau, but rather, to the nations which descended from those two men. This, then, is the passage that St. Paul utilizes:[list]"I have loved you, saith the Lord: and you have said: Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau brother to Jacob, saith the Lord, and I have loved Jacob, But have hated Esau? and I have made his mountains a wilderness, and given his inheritance to the dragons of the desert. But if Edom shall say: We are destroyed, but we will return and build up what hath been destroyed: thus saith the Lord of hosts: They shall build up, and I will throw down: and they shall be called the borders of wickedness, and the people with whom the Lord is angry for ever." (Mal. 1:2-4)
[/list]In this passage, God speaks of how he opposes the proud attitudes and works of Edom, which is the nation that descended from Esau. They do not receive the Lord's correction, for when He punishes them, they only determine all the more to overcome Him, saying, "We are destroyed, but we will return and build up what hath been destroyed." Once again, St. Paul shows how God deals with those who are prideful and who boast in their own works, who build up their kingdoms and cities by their own strength, instead of relying on God. But there is more to this prophecy:[list]"To you, O priests, that despise my name, and have said: Wherein have we despised thy name? You offer polluted bread upon my altar, and you say: Wherein have we polluted thee? In that you say: The table of the Lord is contemptible. If you offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if you offer the lame and the sick, is it not evil? offer it to thy prince, if he will be pleased with it, or if he will regard thy face, saith the Lord of hosts. And now beseech ye the face of God, that he may have mercy on you, (for by your hand hath this been done,) if by any means he will receive your faces, saith the Lord of hosts. Who is there among you, that will shut the doors, and will kindle the fire on my altar gratis? I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts: and I will not receive a gift of your hand. For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clean oblation: for my name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord of hosts." (Mal. 1:7-11)
[/list]St. Paul is saying very many things when he cites from the opening verses of this chapter, none of which are lost on his Jewish readers. In addition to the message that God opposes the proud and boastful, there is also the reminder that, at the time of this prophecy, God was also opposing Israel, and the priests in particular. There is a call to repentence ("now beseech ye the face of God, that he may have mercy on you"), and a prophecy that, one day, it will be the Gentiles who offer pure sacrifices to the Lord. All of these things are fraught with meaning for the Jews to whom St. Paul is writing. They have become proud, they have opposed God by murdering His Messiah, their priests were the ones leading the opposition against Jesus, and now, they need to repent, for the time has come, and now the Gentiles are being welcomed into the Covenant. This is, in essence, St. Paul's message: you, O Israel, have become like the Edomites you so despise.

But what are we to make of words, "Esau I have hated?" Doesn't the Scripture say that "God is love?" How can a God who is, in His very essence, love, say that He hates anyone? The trouble here is that we don't understand God's love, or His hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate), and we can only interpret these words through our own weak, fleshly experiences. God, in fact, loves Edom just as He loves Israel, and it is because of His love that He opposes them. In other words, He loves them enough to desire that they repent and turn to Him, and the only way to do that is to oppose their wickedness. Any good parent will understand this. If your son or daughter wants to go out on a Friday night with some friends of ill-repute, your love for them and your desire for their safety causes you to oppose them, and you say, "I'm sorry, but I won't let you go." And what do they say? "Oh, Mom (or, "oh, Dad"), you hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate) me!" And it's true! You hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate) them (in the sense of opposing them) now, precisely because you love them. This is what St. Paul reveals about God in Romans 1:[list]"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain the truth of God in injustice... Wherefore, God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness: to dishonour their own bodies among themselves." (Rom. 1:18, 24)
[/list]The [i]wrath[/i] of God is shown when He lets us have our own way ("God gave them up to the desires of their heart"). His [i]mercy[/i] is shown when He brings tragedy and calamity upon us, when He opposes our wicked desires by putting all manner of obstacles in our way, in the hopes that we will wake up and repent of our sin. This is the "hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate)" that God shows to Esau, and it is not based upon some arbitrary decision on the part of God, some passing fancy, wherein He decides, quite randomly, "I think I want to hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate) someone today... yes, Esau, you're the one!" Rather, it is based upon the actions of His children that He decides to either love them through "hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate)", by way of opposition and affliction, or to love them through mercy, by giving them prosperity and blessings.[list]"What shall we say then? Is there injustice with God? God forbid! For he saith to Moses: I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. And I will shew mercy to whom I will shew mercy. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy." (Rom. 9:14-16)
[/list]St. Paul again anticipates the argument of his opponents. If God is showing mercy to the other nations, yet He promised His blessings to Israel and they are in danger of being destroyed, then isn't God being unjust? St. Paul's response, which he makes by referring to Exodus and to Moses again, is somewhat complex, but it is truly brilliant:[list]"And the Lord said to Moses: This word also, which thou hast spoken, will I do; for thou hast found grace before me, and thee I have known by name. And he said: Shew me thy glory. He answered: I will shew thee all good, and I will proclaim in the name of the Lord before thee: and I will have mercy on whom I will, and I will be merciful to whom it shall please me. And again he said: Thou canst not see my face: for man shall not see me, and live. And again he said: Behold there is a place with me, and thou shalt stand upon the rock. And when my glory shall pass, I will set thee in a hole of the rock, and protect thee with my righthand till I pass: And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face thou canst not see." (Ex. 33:17-23)
[/list]What is the context of this story, in which Moses is allowed to behold the glory of God? It occurs right after Israel's idolatry with the Golden Calf. St. Paul has not left behind his firstborn/secondborn motif, for in this example, is it Moses, the younger brother, who is shown God's favor, and not Aaron, the eldest brother. Why does God pass over Aaron and show His glory to Moses instead? Any good Jewish reader will know immediately that this story follows the story of the Golden Calf, and will remember that it was Aaron, the firstborn son, who led the people in their sin. It was Aaron who gathered the gold from the people and fashioned the Golden Calf, and it was he who organized the abominable liturgy of the Golden Calf, with all of its sacrifices, dancing, and sexual orgies. Thus, it is not to older, stronger, more powerful Aaron that God shows His glory, but to the younger, holier, more humble Moses.

Is God unjust? No, for He deals with us according to our obedience to Him, as is shown to be the case with Moses and Aaron. In referring to this episode from Exodus, St. Paul springs the trap he has been preparing for the past few verses. He has given three examples in which the firstborn son is passed over in favor of the younger son, in the case of Ishmael and Isaac, in the case of Jacob and Esau, and in the case of Moses and Aaron. What significance does this have for the Jews to whom St. Paul is speaking? His reference to Israel and the Golden Calf makes it clear, for it recalls what God said of Israel at the inception of the Exodus:[list]"And thou shalt say to him: Thus saith the Lord: Israel is my son, my firstborn. I have said to thee: Let my son go, that he may serve me, and thou wouldst not let him go: behold I will kill thy son, thy firstborn." (Ex. 4:22-23)
[/list]The judgment that St. Paul makes against the Jews to whom he is writing is now out in the open: just like Ishmael, just like Esau, and just like Aaron, Israel is the firstborn son. Yet, as St. Paul just reminded them by referring to the Golden Calf, Israel has shown themselves to be a proud, stubborn, and rebellious firstborn son, and thus, as has been the case for the Patriarchs all through their history, their firstborn sonship will be the grounds on which they are condemned, if they do not repent. God will pass over them and favor the younger nations of the Gentiles, for Israel is unrepentent. This is the force of St. Paul's words, "So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy." (Rom. 9:16) God does not favor those with the strongest will, those who can run the fastest, those who are the biggest and strongest. Rather, He favors those who are humble, and who, like Moses, embrace their weakness enough to ask God, "Show me Thy glory."[list]"For the scripture saith to Pharaoh: To this purpose have I raised thee, that I may shew my power in thee and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore he hath mercy on whom he will. And whom he will, he hardeneth." (Rom. 9:17-18)
[/list]What has been shown to be the truth in the other examples holds true here: God does not arbitrarily predestine certain souls to eternal damnation, nor does He choose on a whim that He will hate (don't hate, appreciate) (don't hate (don't hate, appreciate), appreciate) certain people, and love others. Rather, He deals with men according to their obedience, as is shown in the case of Pharaoh. The Reformer points to this example of Pharaoh and says, "You see? God freely chose to harden Pharaoh's heart, so salvation and damnation are entirely the result of God's good pleasure, not Man's Free Will!" But is that what the Scripture is saying here? Does this passage mean that God actively hardened Pharaoh's heart, that He looked down from heaven and said, "That old Pharaoh, I'm afraid he might actually obey me and let my people go, but I want to show the world my power, so I'm going to keep him from doing the right thing?" In the words of St. Paul, "God forbid!" What do the Scriptures say?[list]"Thou shalt speak to him all that I command thee; and he shall speak to Pharaoh, that he let the children of Israel go out of his land. But I shall harden his heart, and shall multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt." (Ex. 7:2-3)

"And Pharaoh seeing that rest was given, hardened his own heart, and did not hear them, as the Lord had commanded." (Ex. 8:15)
[/list]So which one is it? Did God harden Pharaoh's heart, or did Pharaoh harden his own heart? I would propose that both are true, and that what was said before about God's wrath remains true here. God does not show His wrath by actively hardening the heart of Man, so that he can not repent, even if he wanted to. No, God shows His wrath, as we saw in Romans 1:18 and following, by simply letting Man have his own way. He gives His grace only to those who humble themselves and ask for it, but to those who would rather live their lives without God, His punishment is that He does not force Himself upon them. So, in other words, Pharaoh (another firstborn, by the way) had placed his trust in himself, and in his power to establish his own kingdom, and refused to acknowledge the power and sovereign rights of God, and so God says, in effect, "You don't want me? Fine, you won't get me." Pharaoh hardened his own heart, and God "blessed" Pharaoh's decision. However, because He knows the state of Pharaoh's heart, and the extent of Pharaoh's foolish pride, He chooses to use Pharaoh as an example to the Israelites (and ultimately, to the world) of what happens when you are proud, boastful, and unwilling to humble yourself before God: you ultimately lose everything, even the temporal blessings you once enjoyed.

[i]article continued in next post....[/i]

Edited May 21, 2008 by phatcatholic

[phatcatholic]

[i]....article continued[/i]

This becomes St. Paul's warning to and accusation against his Jewish readers. He says to them, you have these precepts written into your very own history, and so you ought to know what becomes of those who harden their hearts against God, those who reject God's mediator. He points out to the Judaizers that the Jewish people have, almost unbelievably, reached the full measure of wickedness, for they who were once God's firstborn son have become like Egypt, their worst enemy. This is nothing original with St. Paul, however, for both Jesus and St. John both said the exact same thing:[list]"Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. They say to him: Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? He saith to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so." (Matt. 19:6-8)

"And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the abyss shall make war against them and shall overcome them and kill them. And their bodies shall lie in the streets of the great city which is called spiritually, Sodom and Egypt: where their Lord also was crucified." (Rev. 1:7-8)
[/list]In the first passage, Jesus describes the condition of the Israelites in Moses' time the same way God describes the condition of Pharaoh: hardness of heart. And St. John says that the "great city" where the "Lord also was crucified," that is, Jerusalem, has become "Sodom and Egypt." A more damning sentence could hardly be pronounced against them. So we see that St. Paul is merely saying something that was well known to the Christians, that is, that Israel had become like Egypt, and just as Sodom and Egypt were judged with destruction by God, so Jerusalem will soon be handed over to the scourge of the Roman Armies.[list]"Thou wilt say therefore to me: Why doth he then find fault? For who resisteth his will? O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it: Why hast thou made me thus? Or hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honour and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath and to make his power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction, That he might shew the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy which he hath prepared unto glory?" (Rom. 9:19-23)
[/list]At last, we come to those most difficult verses, the meaning of which eluded me for many, many years. The Reformed Calvinist will read these verses at their most superficial level, and come away with this interpretation: God arbitrarily chooses, according to whatever pleases Him, which vessels He will create for honor, and which vessels He will create solely for the purpose of destruction. He is absolutely sovereign, and therefore, He has the right to make vessels that are fitted for destruction, and He does so to show His power, to prove that He can do as He pleases.

As I said before, the idea that a God whose principle characteristics are love, mercy, and compassion, would randomly choose to create some souls for no other purpose than to beaver dam them to Hell, and that He would do so for the sole purpose of demonstrating His sovereign power, is an idea that ought to repulse and horrify the children of God. This view presents to us a Deity who is ultimately insecure, like the schoolyard bully who can only prove his superiority and feel big when he is beating up a smaller child. But how can we escape what appears to be the plain meaning of this text? When we consider this proposition, and are naturally driven to ask the question, "If God is the one hardening people's hearts and creating them to be sinners, then how can He find fault with them, beaver dam them forever, and still be just," we find no answer, except for St. Paul's disturbing response, "O man, who art thou that repliest against God?" Alright, so maybe we should just be like Job and be silent before God, but that does little to ease our minds and answer our question.

The key to this riddle is the same as it was in all the other verses: reading St. Paul with the understanding that he never prooftexts the passages of the Old Testament, and so we must not either. Like St. Paul, we must study harder to get a better understanding of the Old Testament texts, so that we can fully grasp the contextual meaning of the citations. St. Paul, who was a zealous Pharisee and a brilliant scholar of the Law and the Prophets before his conversion, certainly knew the texts he was citing, and he selected them very carefully, in order to unfold their wider meaning.

But in the above passages, he never explictly says, "It is written," or in any other way signals his readers that he is citing from the Old Testament, so what would give us any reason to pause and consider his meaning? Ah, but he does signal us that he is citing from the Old Testament! The problem is that we aren't astute enough to recognize it right away, because we haven't studied the Old Testament like we should. However, to his Jewish readers, the words "potter" and "clay" would immediately alert them to the fact that he is quoting from none other than the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah. Far from the meaning that Reformed Calvinists impose upon St. Paul's words, he is actually saying exactly the opposite, and his contextual message is loaded with significance for his Jewish readers. Read this very carefully and see if you can see what the First Century Jew would see:[list]"The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying: Arise, and go down into the potter's house, and there thou shalt hear my words. And I went down into the potter's house, and behold he was doing a work on the wheel. And the vessel was broken which he was making of clay with his hands: and turning he made another vessel, as it seemed good in his eyes to make it. Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: Cannot I do with you, as this potter, O house of Israel, saith the Lord? behold as clay is in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel. I will suddenly speak against a nation, and against a kingdom, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy it. If that nation against which I have spoken, shall repent of their evil, I also will repent of the evil that I have thought to do to them. And I will suddenly speak of a nation and of a kingdom, to build up and plant it. If it shall do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice: I will repent of the good that I have spoken to do unto it. Now therefore tell the men of Juda, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying: Thus saith the Lord: Behold I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you: let every man of you return from his evil way, and make ye your ways and your doings good. And they said; We have no hopes: for we will go after our own thoughts, and we will do every one according to the perverseness of his evil heart." (Jer. 18:1-12)
[/list]How vastly different is this meaning from the meaning that the Reformed Calvinist gives to the words of St. Paul! Where they would say that God predetermines from the beginning which vessels He will set apart for destruction, the text actually says that God gives Man time to repent and change his ways. In Jeremiah's vision, the potter (who is a figure of God) finds the clay (who is a figure of Israel first, and humanity second) difficult to work with, for it breaks the first time through the molding process. But the potter, far from saying, "This is a vessel which I have predestined to destruction," takes the clay and re-shapes it into something useful. God then says, in plain terms, "I may have plans to destroy you, but if you repent, then I will change my plans, and I may have plans for your prosperity, but if you do evil and are disobedient, then I will change those plans too." Far from being destined to Hell, created for the very purpose of destruction, Man has the choice to either repent and be saved, or remain stubborn, and be destroyed.

In the historical context of this passage from Jeremiah, Israel says "we will go after our own thoughts, and we will do each one according to the perverseness of his evil heart." Israel refused to repent. To whom was Jeremiah prophesying? To the Jews in Jerusalem, only years before they were attacked by the Babylonians, sent into exile, and had their temple destroyed. (see Jer. 1:13-15) What might this passage mean to a First Century Jew around 65 AD, with the rumor buzzing amongst the new Christian sect that within 40 years of Jesus' death, not one stone of the temple would be left upon another?

But the words which St. Paul uses are not only remniscent of Jeremiah, they also recall the words of Isaiah:[list]"And the Lord said: Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips glorify me, but their heart is far from me, and they have feared me with the commandment and doctrines of men: Therefore behold I will proceed to cause an admiration in this people, by a great and wonderful miracle: for wisdom shall perish from their wise men, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid. Woe to you that are deep of heart, to hide your counsel from the Lord: and their works are in the dark, and they say: Who seeth us, and who knoweth us? This thought of yours is perverse: as if the clay should think against the potter, and the work should say to the maker thereof: Thou madest me not: or the thing framed should say to him that fashioned it: Thou understandest not." (Is. 29:13-16)

"Thus saith the Lord to my anointed Cyrus, whose right hand I have taken hold of, to subdue nations before his face, and to turn the backs of kings, and to open the doors before him, and the gates shall not be shut. I will go before thee, and will humble the great ones of the earth: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and will burst the bars of iron. And I will give thee hidden treasures, and the concealed riches of secret places: that thou mayest know that I am the Lord who call thee by thy name, the God of Israel. For the sake of my servant Jacob, and Israel my elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have made a likeness of thee, and thou hast not known me... Woe to him that gainsayeth his maker, a sherd of the earthen pots: shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it: What art thou making, and thy work is without hands?" (Is. 45:1-4, 9)
[/list]Once again St. Paul's genius is displayed, for his subtle use of the words "potter" and "clay," without explicitly stating which passage he is referring to, causes the reader to remember all of these texts which speak of the potter and the clay. Isaiah, like Jeremiah, prophesied to Jerusalem regarding their impenitent hearts and their impending doom. The proud attitude which Israel displayed in Isaiah 29 is the attitude which St. Paul implicitly accuses the Jews in his day of having. The mention in Isaiah 45 of the Gentile ruler, Cyrus, who would ultimately conquer Jerusalem and overcome the Babylonians, is St. Paul's prophetic way of reminding First Century Jerusalem that their days are numbered, and that soon, another Gentile ruler (the Caesar of Rome) will be used as a chastening rod in God's hands against His people.

In summary, then, instead of expliciting citing from any of these three texts, St. Paul hints at some key words to evoke memories of all three texts, which combined give the force of this message: God will reshape you like a potter reshapes the clay, if you will only humble yourselves, repent, and be moldable, but if you won't, if you mimic your forefathers in their stubborn hard-heartedness, there is a Gentile ruler waiting in the wings to visit His destruction upon you. In other words, when St. Paul's opponents say, "Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will," the answer that he gives is more than just, "How dare you ask such things of God," it is, "Remember your history, you Jews - you are resisting God's will, and so He does find fault with you!"

This is why St. Paul can say that God "endured with much patience vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction, That he might shew the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy which he hath prepared unto glory." Like with Pharaoh, who was given ten chances (in the ten plagues) to repent, so the Jews have been given a generation's time to repent and be saved, and so God is enduring with "much patience" these willing "vessels of wrath," who, because of their stubborn pride, are only "fitted for destruction." It is precisely because God shows so much patience to these vessels of wrath that the other nations will see how merciful He really is, especially when they realize that Israel's damnable attitude now is exactly the damnable attitude they (that is, the Gentile nations) once had. Egypt will look on and realize that what they once were, Israel now is, and they will understand that if God will destroy Israel for an Egypt-like attitude, then He would have been justified in destroying them too. God does with Israel what he did with Pharaoh: he recognizes a hard heart, and so He uses the impenitent as an example to the other nations.

To give an example, consider two brothers who are alcoholics. The younger brother is punished by God's mercy, in that he ends up in a car wreck that nearly takes his life. As a result, he wakes up to his own condition, and is sufficiently shaken to swear off drinking forever. However, his older brother continues his drunken lifestyle, and later gets in a car wreck himself. Only the older brother, rather than do as the younger brother did and swear off drinking, recovers from the accident and continues drinking himself silly. A few years later, his wife leaves him, but he still continues in his sin. Years later, he loses his job, and yet he still doesn't change his ways. Finally, he gets pulled over for drunk driving and is thrown in jail. What might the younger brother be learning through the example of his older brother? He should be humbled, realizing that he could still be in that same situation himself, had he not taken God's first warning seriously. He should also marvel at God's patience and mercy in dealing with his older brother, for he knows that at any time, God could allow the older brother to kill himself through too much drinking, and He would be just in doing so. This is exactly what God is doing with Israel, who is the firstborn son, the oldest brother to all the other nations.

But, did I not say at the beginning of this article that St. Paul's overarching purpose in the book of Romans was to show that God had not abandoned or rejected His chosen people? Yes, and St. Paul goes to great lengths to show that God will not break His original covenant with Abraham, but that He will remain faithul, and they will not ultimately be put to shame. The key truth for St. Paul, however, is that it is not necessarily natural biology which makes one a Jew, nor is it the initiating rite of circumcision into the Law which secures one's place in the Abrahamic covenant, which from the beginning promised that all nations of the earth would be blessed through Abraham. This is the premise with which St. Paul begins his argument way back in chapter 2:[list]"For it is not he is a Jew, who is so outwardly: nor is that circumcision which is outwardly in the flesh. But he is a Jew that is one inwardly and the circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit not in the letter: whose praise is not of men, but of God." (Rom. 2:28-29)
[/list]St. Paul goes on in chapter 9 to establish this point, that God has not completely rejected His people (an assertion he made in Romans 3:3, "For what if some of them have not believed? Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid!")[list]"Even us, whom also he hath called, not only of the Jews but also of the Gentiles. As in Hosea he saith: I will call that which was not my people, my people; and her that was not beloved, beloved; and her that had not obtained mercy; one that hath obtained mercy. And it shalt be in the place where it was said unto them: you are not my people; there they shall be called the sons of the living God." (Rom. 9:24-26)
[/list]This is perhaps St. Paul's most brilliant argument yet. It appears at first that he has mishandled and prooftexted the passage from Hosea:[list]"And she conceived again, and bore a daughter, and he said to him: Call her name, Without Mercy: for I will not add any more to have mercy on the house of Israel, but I will utterly forget them... And she weaned her that was called Without Mercy. And she conceived, and bore a son. And he said: Call his name, Not My People: for you are not my people, and I will not be yours." (Hos. 1:6, 8-9)

"And I will espouse thee to me for ever: and I will espouse thee to me in justice, and judgment, and in mercy, and in commiserations. And I will espouse thee to me in faith: and thou shalt know that I am the Lord... And I will sow her unto me in the earth, and I will have mercy on her that was Without Mercy. And I will say to that which is Not My People: Thou art my people: and they shall say: Thou art my God." (Hos. 2:19-20,23-24)
[/list]God had commanded the prophet Hosea to marry a prostitute, in order that through his marriage to an adulterous wife, Hosea would become a figure of God, who was Himself married to the adulterous nation of Israel. When Hosea's wife gave birth, God commanded that the child's name be "Without Mercy," to show that He would not have mercy on Israel. Later, another child was born to Hosea, and God commanded that his name be "Not My People," to show that Israel was no longer the people of God. In chapter 2, however, God relents and says that, in the New Covenant, those who were once "not my people" will again be "my people," and those who were once "without mercy" will again be shown mercy.

In it's original context, the passage refers to the Jews, but St. Paul applies it to the Gentile nations, saying, "Even us, whom also he hath called, not only of the Jews but also of the Gentiles. As in Hosea he saith: I will call that which was not my people, my people." It almost seems as if St. Paul is saying the those who were once "not my people" are the Gentile nations, when in Hosea, those who were once "not my people" are actually the Jews. What is happening here? Has St. Paul finally fumbled?

His logic is sheer genius. All throughout Romans 9, he has been trying to show how the Jews have become like all the nations they once despised. They have become like Ishmael (the Arabs), they have become like Esau (the Edomites), they have become like Pharaoh (the Egyptians), and so, in effect, they have themselves become Gentile nations in their hearts. Thus, if God will show mercy to the Gentile nations, as He had been doing in the early Church at the time of St. Paul's writing, then surely He will have mercy also on the Jews, who have become as Gentiles in their disobedience. This is exactly what St. Paul concludes in Romans 11:[list]"And if some of the branches be broken and thou, being a wild olive, art ingrafted in them and art made partaker of the root and of the fatness of the olive tree: Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root: but the root thee. Thou wilt say then: The branches were broken off that I might be grafted in. Well: because of unbelief they were broken off. But thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear. For if God hath not spared the natural branches, fear lest perhaps also he spare not thee. See then the goodness and the severity of God: towards them indeed that are fallen, the severity; but towards thee, the goodness of God, if thou abide in goodness. Otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again. For if thou were cut out of the wild olive tree, which is natural to thee; and, contrary to nature, wert grafted into the good olive tree: how much more shall they that are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? For I would not have you ignorant, brethren, of this mystery (lest you should be wise in your own conceits) that blindness in part has happened in Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles should come in." (Rom. 11:17-25)
[/list]I do not have the time to explore more fully the arguments presented by St. Paul in chapters 10 and 11, but I did wish to at least give a "sneak preview" of how the story ends. What St. Paul set out to prove at the beginning of Romans, he proves irrefutably in Romans 9-11, that God has not rejected His people, and that He will still be faithful to His covenant to Abraham. The only hope for the Jews, however, is to recognize that it is not those who bear the circumcision of the flesh, like Abraham, who are the true heirs of Abraham's promise, but it is those who have the circumcision of the heart (that is, faith), like Abraham, who will be counted as his true sons and heirs to the promised blessings of the New Covenant.

Suffice it to say, then, that the Reformers who fail to take into account the way in which St. Paul uses Old Testament texts have unwittingly misunderstood St. Paul's message, and have distorted the truth. This comes as no surprise, for as St. Peter said:[list]"And account the longsuffering of our Lord, salvation: as also our most dear brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, hath written to you: As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which there are certain things that are hard to understand, which the unlearned and unstable distort, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction." (2 Pet. 3:15-16)
[/list]Given the complex manner in which St. Paul weaves together Old Testament texts, with the presupposition that his readers are intimately familiar with the stories and events he evokes, and given that so many of us (Catholics and Protestants alike) know so very little of the Old Testament, St. Peter could not have spoken truer words. I have shown multiple times how the failure to understand the Old Testament texts which St. Paul cites often leads to an interpretation that is the exact opposite of what he intended. I cannot fault my Reformed brethren, for if I had not had good mentors and teachers, I would still be twisting and distorting the meaning of St. Paul, as I had done so often in the past.

In closing, I wish to make the words of St. Paul (my patron saint, for those who are interested) my own: "I speak the truth in Christ: I lie not, my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost: That I have great sadness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I wished myself to be an anathema from Christ, for my brethren: who are my kinsmen according to the flesh." May God be pleased to use my small efforts to illumine the hearts of "my kinsmen according to the flesh," the Reformed Calvinists, that they may see and believe the glorious truths of the Catholic Faith.

Edited August 4, 2005 by phatcatholic

[goldenchild17]

Very good article. Thanks for posting.

[phatcatholic]

its probably the best article on the letter to the romans that i have ever read.

[lilac_angel]

This is excellent...

[thessalonian]

I don't know how many times I point out Romans 2:4-8 to them and they ignore it. Sad. Truly sad. They don't understand the difference between the works of man and Christ working in and through us to his glory (eph 3:20-21). They don't understand the difference between a work of the law and works of love, i.e. charity, though it is as plain as the nose on their face if they will just read Is 1! I have no use for your sacrifices, care for the widow and the orphan. in summary. To which I add James 1:27 "pure religion is to care for the widow and the orphan", i.e. charity.

[thessalonian]

I'm about half way through. Great article so far. I'll finish it up later.

[Ziggamafu]

Phatcatholic = Win

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Peace,
Nice, halfway through as well,should documents be copied like this and dropped by planes... , food for the spirit and for an oppresessed concience due to mis-understanding and or persecution. Thanks Bro.

[Selah]

love it. Thank you, Phatcatholic

[Donna]

Phat strikes again!

My hero ~

[jwingert72]

Beautifully said and beautifully written. A delight to read. Thank you for your shared wisdom!