On the Saying of the Apostle, "I Do Not What I Want

^A Likewise, if nature produces the wool, but wisdom perfects what nature has provided, it hands it over to the free will. Our wool is ours henceforth; it is in your hands to perfect also the vessel of honor, if you are the one perfecting the vessel of dishonor. You are a dyer; you have received from nature the dyeing—just like a certain dye. Do you wish to dye the wool with royal purple, to be made a son of the king? You dye it with evil deeds; you become a son of darkness and of night, not by nature causing this, but by [the] choice of will inducing the difference. There is nothing, therefore, by necessity, even if the contentious struggle. For by God’s grace, as far as was possible for our powers, we have provided the solution; so that you may not henceforth pose questions [arising] from the sentences. And pay close attention. If anyone should oppose, resist him in this way so that you may overthrow him with his own arms. And not because vessels are mostly kept in the house, do you use them indiscriminately for all things; but you know what kind of vessel receives wine, and what kind receives vinegar. ^B So God knows what soul is apt for receiving mercy, and what soul is worthy of punishment; not because it was made so, but because it prepared itself so through its life. For this reason, brother, He calls "vessels" both those who are punished and those who receive mercy. "(But if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction, that he might show the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy)"—and He made the one a vessel of wrath who received wrath, and the other a vessel of mercy who received kindness, so as to show that every man calls upon himself either wrath or mercy. But perhaps someone will refute this voice, or this saying, "vessels of wrath fitted to destruction." So, he says, it was not fitted from a life of purpose, but He made it so fitted. But one must know that it is not made so by nature, but by the choice of the will. Receive the testimony of this, that to be "fitted" means to make oneself worthy of either punishment or clemency by one's purpose. For He says—I do not know the Scriptures accurately. But what is sought is that you might receive salvation. For he who is cured by a doctor does not explore the nature of the remedies, but seeks that he may be healed. ^C If he who contradicts should ask, "How did you learn? how were you taught?" answer, "How I learned, I know; how to explain it, I do not know." For I did not cure, but I have been cured, so as to obtain a firm soul. If you see him still persisting, say: "I am not a doctor, nor am I skilled in the art of medicine; go to the doctors, and they will teach you of the help of medicines." Would that we, who have been healed by medicine, might return glory to the only doctor and wise God: to Him be glory and power for ages of ages. Amen.

ADMONITION

ON THE SAYING OF THE APOSTLE: NOT THAT WHICH I WILL I DO, BUT THAT WHICH I HATE, THAT I DO (Rom. 7. 19): AND HOW JACOB WAS A TYPE OF CHRIST. BUT IN THE EXORDIUM OF THE DISCOURSE, AGAINST THE SPECTATORS OF THE THEATERS.

^A I praise your longing, and I marvel at your zeal, and I approve this fair contest. For there is no turmoil here that gives birth to tumult, but a stillness of soul that weaves a crown of justice. I surely deem your zeal blessed, by which you were moved to endure every labor, being attached to divine protection. But as I admire this zeal, so I dislike your labor on vain things. For yesterday this sacred assembly was snatched away from us, and in place of this divine and blessed study, the hippodrome received the people; and I marveled that, having dismissed the contest of the divine word, you sought the contest of horses. For there it was possible to see the course of horses; here, the chariot of God, thousandfold, in which are thousands of those who rejoice (Ps. LXVII, 18). ^B There it was possible to see the contest, the course, and the contention; here, desire, zeal, and alacrity. One chariot defeats a thousand chariots. For there is one chariot of God, [and] many chariots of the wicked. But this chariot rightly performs the course of piety, but they are overturned by the divine chariot. For He says: "Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will be magnified in the name of the Lord our God. They are bound and fallen: but we are risen, and stand upright" (Ps. XIX, 8-9). This chariot does not throw horses, does not overturn men; but it dissipates demons, and levels the tyranny of the devil to the ground. God has a chariot joined not to four horses, but to a thousand souls. For, "the chariot of God," he says, "is a thousandfold, thousands of those who rejoice" (Ps. LXVII, 18). ^C The horses of God are holy souls, the horses of God are the souls of the apostles, who roam the whole earth and bring salvation to the world. For the cavalry of the apostles is the salvation of the world. Therefore the prophet foretold, saying: "You have led your horses into the sea, and your cavalry is salvation" (Habac. III, 15). For these horses brought salvation to the faithful, and troubled the enemies of the Church. "You have led," he says, "into the sea your horses, troubling many waters" (Habac. III, 8). The preaching of the apostles troubled the assemblies of the nations: many kings were troubled, many tyrants were confounded, not bearing the course of apostolic grace. Therefore those who were troubled by the course of the apostles said: "These that have turned the world upside down are come hither also" (Acts XVII, 6). ^D See the chariot of God, see the horses that have received the bridle of piety. Do not oppose the word of truth, nor imitate the impulses of brute beasts, kicking against the divine law; lest it also be said to you divinely: "Why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the pricks" (Acts IX, 4-5). Let us take the bridle of piety, and turning our eyes to a straight spectacle, let us see the charioteers of piety, the prophets and apostles. The prophets are the charioteers of truth, and the governors of well-ordered courses. Such was Elias, to whom Eliseus cried: "My father, my father, the chariot of Israel, and the driver thereof" (4 Reg. II, 12). But above all things piety is to be preferred. Lest, when you hear the word of God, after you willingly receive the doctrine, having gone forth from there, you should be like the brutes. Both with mind and with eyes intent, love the word of God. Do not divide your gaze between a base spectacle and divine study: accustom your eye to look at nothing else except heavenly beauty, so that you may say: "I have lifted up my eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help" (Ps. CXXII, 1). Accustom your ears, not to clamors and tumults, but to the divine law, saying: "I will incline my ear to a parable; and I will hear what the Lord God will speak in me" (Ps. XLVIII, 5 and LXXXIV, 9). It is not fitting to speak flatteries: but to teach the things that profit for instruction. For there is no profit in flattery, [but] great utility in discipline. Do not be caught by your mind by absurd spectacles, nor apply your mind to alien songs. For you can rule your own mind.

you are not a slave but free; you are not driven into captivity against your will, but willingly you sell yourself to sin. Do not lay hold of the apostolic voice; do not, when the conviction of truth enters, convicting the hidden things of the heart, say: "Am I then superior to Paul who says, 'The thing that I would, that I do not; but what I hate, that I do'?" Do not, serving your own habit, slander the divine steps; do not, while fulfilling your own desire, calumniate the apostolic glory. For many often fashion pretexts for their sins, and put forward to us the apostolic word which was just now read to us. "Paul," he says, "the chosen vessel, who was governed continually by the Holy Spirit, said: 'The thing that I would, that I do not; but what I hate, that I do. I delight in the law of God after the inward man; but I see another law in my members warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin.'" Every lover of sin is accustomed to finding a trustworthy person who struggles along with his sin, and they gladly run down the apostles, not that they may insult them, but that they may provide an apology for themselves. "Paul," he says, "said: 'For I know that there does not dwell in me,' that is, in my flesh, 'any good thing.'" If then no good dwells in Paul, how, he says, is it possible for there to be a dwelling of good in me, and for me to partake of good, and for a root of good to be in me? If we find such a man as that being held captive by sin, as he himself described, what is that to me, the wretch who is enslaved to sin? ^A Therefore, so that two things may not become base—that the apostolic word be slandered, and that we cloak ourselves with license for our sins—it is necessary to unfold the entire apostolic thought. The key, therefore, to all the difficulties in the Scriptures is the thesis. For when someone knows the intent of the speaker, and to whom the word is addressed, and concerning what things, he renders the contemplation of the words clear and unconfused. ^B 666 ...the act of sin, but the devil. Why does he call the devil sin? Because he became the teacher of sin. For if one does not pay heed to the idioms of Scripture, he slips greatly and falls away from the target of truth. It is the custom of Scripture to call the devil sin. Why? Because he became teacher, and introducer, and patron of sin. Similarly, Scripture also calls our Savior the Lord Jesus Christ "righteousness," not as the act of righteousness, but as the teacher of righteousness. On account of this, Paul says concerning Him: "Who was made unto us wisdom and righteousness, and sanctification and redemption from God" (1 Cor. 1:30). Just as therefore Christ is called righteousness, inasmuch as He is the source of righteousness; so also the devil, having become the introducer and teacher of sin, received the appellation of sin. "Sin revived, and I died; and the commandment which was unto life, this was found to be unto death" (Rom. 7:10). For God gave to Adam a commandment, not that he should die, but that he should live. The commandment, therefore, he says, which was given to me unto life, this was found to be unto death, not that it itself changed, but that I, through the transgression, overturned its life-giving efficacy. One must look closely at all of the questions that arise. For immediately the enemy of the Scriptures, and one not brought up in the word of piety, proceeds to nothing else but this: "Did God not know," he says, "that Adam was going to sin? Did He not know that he would not keep the commandment? Did He not know that he would be deceived by the serpent? Why, therefore, did He give the commandment to him who was not going to keep the commandment?" But one must know that God foreknows indeed all things, but He gives the laws, ^C not looking only at the one who will transgress, but also at the one who will succeed. Why indeed do you, as an enemy, examine the foreknowledge one-sidedly? Why do you say that God did not know that Adam would sin? Why do you pass over in silence the things that follow and the things that result from the very sequence itself? But you keep silent, acting ignorantly; but I proclaim, believing that just as God foreknew that Adam would transgress, so He knew that Abel would be justified, He foreknew that Enoch would be translated, He foreknew that the choir of the saints would be constituted, He foreknew that Noah would escape the universal destruction, He foreknew that Abraham, the root of faith, would flourish, He foreknew that patriarchs would shine, prophets would flourish, apostles would stand out, and out of the very dough that was going to transgress, the much-hymned beauty of the economy of the Savior would flourish. He foreknew the course of the apostles, He foreknew the endurance of the martyrs, He foreknew the struggles of the confessors, He foreknew the assemblages of the monastics, He foreknew the flowers of the Churches, He foreknew the choir of the priests, He foreknew all those standing in truth at the altar. What then? Was it necessary on account of the foreknowledge of such great goods to bring in the creation? ^D "For sin, taking occasion, through the commandment deceived me, and by it killed me" (Rom. 7:11). Sin, that is, the devil. "Taking occasion." What kind? Since God said: "From every tree that is in the paradise you shall eat; but from the tree of knowing good and evil you shall not eat; for in whatever day you eat, you shall die by death"; the devil, taking occasion from the commandment, fashions a slander, and says to him: "God knew that in whatever day you eat, you shall become as gods, and He hindered you." He slanders God as jealous, and runs him down as though God were envious. "God is envious of you," he says, "of divinity; He forbade you to eat from the tree from which the being-equal-to-God was about to spring up for you." Taking occasion, therefore, sin, through the commandment, deceived. Well did he say, "He deceived." For he did not promise the truth, but deceived, and by it killed. For the deception brought forth death; for the creation was not mortal. For many, indeed, have thought even this, that God made the creation mortal; but the creation was not mortal. For even if it was earthly, yet it had been created immortal. For if it had not been created immortal, but was created mortal, what it had in its nature, why did it receive it according to a decree? If this creation were mortal, why does God put as its penalty of transgression death? "For in whatever day you eat, you shall die by death." Therefore, before he ate, the creation was immortal. But if even before he ate it was mortal, what is said is deception and mockery, and not truth—for He threatens me. And no one threatens someone with sleep, when... [alt-version omitted] The Apostle, in order that I may use a clear and concise word, paints an image of every man, of him who was fashioned from the beginning, and him who was tutored in the law, and him who was liberated in grace; and he paints as in an image, by the word. What then was Adam before the commandment? And what did he become after the commandment? What state did he have in the law, and what appellation did he receive in grace? And just as if I say today: "God made us according to His image and likeness, but because we transgressed the commandment, we were cast out of paradise," I do not take the matter into myself, but I refer the ancient history to myself; for I neither saw paradise, nor was I cast out of paradise, but I paint the passion of the father and the first origin of the disaster, and I say: "I was fashioned, I transgressed, I was cast out, I was tutored, I was recalled"; so also Paul narrates concerning Adam, who he was before the commandment of the law (and by law I mean that which was given in paradise), and he says in the person of Adam: "For I was alive without the law once" (Rom. 7:9). Was Paul then older than the law? Paul was after all those who were nurtured in the law, after the appearing of Christ. If then he is after the law, how does he put himself as older than the law? For he shows from what he says that he was older than the law: "I was alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived." Did the commandment come after Paul? And so that no one may think that there was a law before Paul, but he himself was alive without the law once, having taken up a heathen life, but after these things he was tutored by the law—the history convicts the truth. For there is no Paul when he lived without the law. For how, he who says: "A Hebrew of Hebrews, circumcised the eighth day, of the race of Israel" (Philip. 3:5)? When then did he live without the law? "I was alive without the law; but when the commandment came." Which? The one saying: "From every tree that is in the paradise you shall eat." "But when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died." See how, as if in a balance, he puts in the word sin and righteousness; that then sin is dead, when the commandment is accomplished; then man dies, when sin is prospered. For to say, "But when the commandment came, sin revived," shows that before the transgression, sin was dead. But he calls sin, not...

^A anything immortal that was created, but mortal. If that work of God was mortal, why did God impose death upon it as a punishment for transgression? "In the day that you eat of it, you shall surely die." Therefore, before he ate, the work of God was immortal. But if it were mortal before he ate, such a threat would have been deceptive and ridiculous, not the truth; for he would have been threatening to make it what it already was. Now, no one threatens another with sleep, which he has by nature; no one threatens another with food, which he takes by nature; but God threatens death. This work of God did not undergo death by its creation, but underwent it because of sin. For if Adam had persevered in keeping the divine commandment and the law, death would have had no place. ^B The wise oracle testifies to this: "God did not make death, nor does he delight in the destruction of the living; for by the envy of the devil, death entered into the world" (Wisdom 1:13; 2:24). Wherefore, to speak truly, our being mortal happened to us against nature; but the resurrection restores to us what was by nature. Therefore it is called a "resurrection," because the corrupted work that fell through sin is raised up through justice. If Adam had persevered in the commandment, he would have remained alive. And what is the sponsor for this, so that it may not be thought to be said by conjecture? Therefore, brothers, that we may not treat divine matters with conjectures, but use the sequence of events to attain the clear truth of things, the immortality of the work is testified to by what follows. If the work was mortal by nature, if it was addicted to death not through sin but through nature itself, how did Elijah and Enoch conquer nature? How was Elijah ^C taken up and did not taste death? How was Enoch translated, not experiencing death? Look at the pledges of the original creation. Thus, man could have lived forever if he had kept the divine law. For this reason, God took the first-fruits of our race and translated them into immortality. And behold the wise economy. He took Enoch before many generations; He snatched Elijah after many generations, and did so usefully. For because true piety was to exist among two peoples, those having the uncircumcision and those professing circumcision; He does not take only Elijah, lest the Jew glory in being honored by these first-fruits; but He takes Enoch first, who had not lived according to the law, but had preserved the ecclesiastical order. For all things that were before the law were a figure of the Church. Interrogate the righteous up to Abraham and up to the law, and find out who they were. Everything revolves around three names: into ^D the unbelieving gentility; into Judaism, who walked according to the law; and into Christianity, which was led according to the evangelical grace. Let the adversaries be interrogated about Adam, Abel, Enoch, Seth, and Noah, and as many as lived uprightly until Abraham, as to who they were. Were they Gentiles? Truth does not permit this. They were not Gentiles; for they did not live in unbelief, they did not serve demons, they were not subject to idols, they resisted the error of demons. Therefore, they cannot be called Gentiles. But what were they? Were they Jews? But they did not receive the law, they did not keep the Sabbaths, they did not observe the distinctions of foods, they did not have circumcision. If, therefore, those ancients were neither Gentiles nor Jews, let another name be found that could fit them. If those who lived before the law were neither Jews nor Gentiles, what name is to be given to them? What remains, if not Christians—not, indeed, by name, but by virtue? Thus all the types of the Church shone forth. Enoch was uncircumcised, just as the Church: he did not serve the law, just as the people of Christ: he did not know the distinctions of foods, just as the Church which is versed in the divine law. The Church which walked in the type of true piety is the most ancient of all: and the faith of Abraham was an image, not of the Jews, but of the Church. Therefore the Apostle explores the discourse about faith, and to show that Abraham is an image of the Church and not of the Jews, he says: "Brothers, it is written: Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness." When, therefore, was it reckoned? In circumcision or in uncircumcision? (Rom. 4:3, 10). Thus says Paul, who was from the Jews, who knew the law, and explained legal matters. Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. "And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised" (Rom. 4:11). Behold the complicated speculation of the sentences; see how the Apostle segregates Israel from Abraham, as not having the property of faith; though he joins to him the Gentiles, as having the character of true piety. "And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of righteousness, so that he might be the Father of all who believe through uncircumcision." Do you see how the figure of the Church was in Abraham? But the Savior, to show that the evangelical state is reduced to that ancient institution, when the Jews said: "Moses wrote, If anyone wishes to divorce his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce" (Matt. 19:7), does not solve it, but to declare the true doctrine, he says: "Moses spoke to the hardness of your heart; but from the beginning it was not so" (Matt. 19:8). See how he leads us back to the ancient things.

[alt-version omitted]

^A and I will wipe them out, and I will make you into a great nation, and much more. If you hold this in your own self as an image of the ancient history of the Church, how did the law slip in? As Lia to Rachel. But that, brothers, this was not a mere speculation or a forced allegory, but truly an image of Jacob, and that Jacob fulfilled a type of God—who possessed once the synagogue and now the Church—the prophet himself testifies: I have multiplied visions, and I was likened in the hands of the prophets (Osee 12. 10, 12). And Jacob served for a woman, and for a woman he guarded me.

Why then did he guard? Or how did he guard? You will find, brother, according to another contemplation again, that Jacob received the woman in one way, and Isaac, the father of Jacob, in another. Isaac, when he took his woman, did not come himself into the midst of the rivers to take her, but sent his servant, and he betrothed her; but Jacob is not betrothed through a servant, but through himself. For this also was a type of the Old and the New. For God, having betrothed the old synagogue, receives it through the servant Moses. Isaac, receiving a woman, is betrothed through a servant, and having been betrothed through a servant, takes her. ^B But Jacob does not send a servant, although he had servants, but he himself came into the midst of the rivers. He came alone, he who had many servants; alone he came, he who had many beasts of burden. For God blessed the house of the Master Abraham in cattle, and silver, and gold, and servants, and horses, and with all other things. And having such possessions, he comes carrying only a staff, and Jacob says: With my staff I passed over this Jordan (Gen. 32. 10), as if to say: Possessing only a staff I went out alone, I, the master of many. Jacob went out alone, came to Bethel, and slept in the evening, and placed a stone beneath his head; he did not find a house, he found no lodging. For he was an image of the One who says, The Son of man has not where to lay his head (Matt. 8. 20).

Then, brothers, sleeping, he sees heaven opened. For just as for Christ there was nowhere to lay his head on earth, but heaven was opened to him and the heavenly things, so Jacob sleeps, having no house, and seeing heaven opened, and a ladder established from earth to heaven. It was also, by another account, a type of those who are persecuted. Since, fleeing from Esau, he came into the midst of the rivers, God wishing to show that to every one who is persecuted on earth heaven is opened, he sees heaven opened, and a ladder established from earth to heaven, and the angels of God ascending and descending through the ladder. And the Lord, he says, was established upon it (Gen. 28. 15). He did not say simply, He was sitting, but, He was established upon the ladder. What then is the ladder? An image of the cross. For through it, it is possible to ascend to heaven. And some, through it, ascended to heaven, others through it descended. The Jews fell from the heavens through the cross, and the nations are led up to heaven through the cross.

4. But everywhere one must avoid allegory, and seal what is said with scriptural testimonies, that the Savior might show through the Gospels that those angels who were ascending and descending fulfilled an image of evangelical grace; he says to Nathanael: Because I said to you, I saw you under the fig tree, you believed; you shall see greater things than these. Amen, I say to you, hereafter you shall see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man (John 1. 50, 51). He came to the midst of the rivers, and as he saw the vision, he says: This is not another thing, but the house of ` ^C God. And indeed you did not see the construction of a house, but a ladder; but because he knew that the ladder is a type of the Church, he says: This is the house of God, this is the Church. And whence this, that the Church is the house of God? Paul says to Timothy, writing these things: I hope to come to you sooner. But if I delay, that you may know how it is necessary to conduct oneself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God (1 Tim. 3. 14, 15).

Then, fulfilling through all things the image of Christ—the one who owns nothing, the one who hates wealth, the one who accepts no worldly phantasm—he says: If the Lord God will be with me, and will give me bread to eat and a garment to put on (Gen. 28. 20). ^D See how the philosophic soul does not depart from self-sufficiency. If the Lord God will be with me, and will guide me in the way, and will give me bread to eat and a garment to put on. Before the evangelical [teachings], the apostolic ones speak. And if he will give me bread to eat and a garment to put on. Paul speaks through Jacob: For having food and coverings, we shall be content (1 Tim. 6. 8). This place will be to me the house of God. For this is also what Bethel is interpreted to be. For Beth is house; and El, of God. He went into the midst of the rivers, and first a well meets him. He came upon the well, and this was covered, and he found shepherds there. An image in all things of Christ. The first presence of Christ is upon the baptism, upon the well, a well leaping into eternal life (John 4. 14). He finds the well covered, since also grace before his presence was covered. Jacob says to the shepherds, Why do you stand idle? It is a long time; water the sheep and lead them away. They say to him, We cannot, until all the shepherds arrive, roll away the stone. And what does Jacob do immediately? That which had to be done by many and by all the shepherds, he does by himself. For having taken it, he rolls away the stone. How then could he alone do this, which many did with difficulty? But because he was an image of Christ, and the Scripture showed the power of the Master, that what the many were unable to accomplish, the evangelical grace accomplished. There he finds Rachel coming; for everywhere the ancient just ones received their betrothals from wells. Moses from a well got the woman the daughter of Jothor, Jacob from a well, the servant of Abraham from a well received Rebecca. Everywhere the betrothals of the ancients were from a well, because also Christ does not otherwise betroth the Church, except from the waters. And to truncate: he entered, he asked for Rachel, Lia slipped in.

It is necessary, therefore, to hold to the matter before us, and to return to what is before us. The law, therefore, "slipped in" [paréisēlthen], it did not "enter" [eisēlthen]; since even Lia did not "enter," but "slipped in." For "to enter" is to use frankness openly; but "to slip in" is to enter secretly with another, deviating. Sin, therefore, "slipped in," and the devil "slipped in" through the law. For sin, having taken an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me, and through it killed me (Rom. 7. 11). That, therefore, no one might think the commandment to be death-bringing, he says: so the law indeed is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good. The good, then, has become death to me? By no means; but that sin might appear, through the good, working death for me (Ibid. 12, 13). Everywhere he calls sin "sinner," that is, the devil. That, he says, the devil might appear as a sinner beyond measure, through the commandment working death. We know that the law is spiritual, but I am fleshly (Ibid. 14). You, Paul, fleshly, you who are governed by the Holy Spirit, you who have Christ speaking in you? If you are fleshly, why did you deceive your disciples saying: You are not in the flesh, but in the spirit (Ibid. 8. 9)? Your disciples are not in the flesh, and you are fleshly? But I am fleshly. I. Who? He who lived before the law and in the law, Sold under sin. He did not say, sold by sin, but, sold to sin. For no other person among men sold him, but he sold himself. For just as among us men there are some who are sold by necessity, and there are others who participate in freedom, but through the marriage of handmaidens or some other necessity they deliver themselves to slavery; so also man, being free in nature, and having obtained a free nature, willingly sold himself. Do you wish to see a man selling himself? See what Elias says to Achab, as God sent him to reproach him because of the vineyard, which he took away from Nabuthe. Achab says to him: Have you found me, my enemy? Elias says to him: I have found you, because you sold yourself to do evil before the Lord (3 Reg. 21. 20). For our sale is because of the works of wickedness. But I am fleshly, sold under sin. For he who is caught by bad habit, not even if he wishes, easily casts himself out of slavery. For habit is a second nature; and nature fights against men. For this reason he added: For what I will, this I do not, as having been sold once.

^A And neither do I work what I will. These words befit a slave. For just as he does not do what he wills, but what he is ordered, so man did not have the power of doing what he wished, but was ordered by sin. For sin was already reigning; and it was impossible to contradict a king. Man was therefore sold, not Paul, but the image of man, the figment of freedom. To conclude in few words, when he had provided many proofs of the slavery introduced by force, he added: "Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me from the body of this death?" (Rom. 7. 24). Do you see how he introduced man, as if agitated by bitter slavery and tyranny, one who desired to shake off slavery, pursued freedom, and asked for a benefit? "Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me? Who will come?" "I thank God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Ibid. v. 25). That he might show you that he calls him sold to sin who was once under the law, but calls those free from the sale who had been redeemed by the evangelical grace: "Wretched man that I am, who will deliver me? I thank God through our Lord Jesus Christ." He delivered me from the law of sin. "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free" (Rom. 8. 2). Do you see how he introduced man as both freed and formerly enslaved? He does not speak only of himself, but of all human nature at once. "For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and of death." And how were you delivered? "For what was impossible for the law, in which it was infirm through the flesh" (Ibid. v. 3). Because the law commanded the good, but the flesh did not obey, as being sold to sin; what the law could not effect because of the infirmity of the flesh, it effected through the power of Christ's flesh. "For what was impossible for the law, in which it was infirm, because of the infirmity of the flesh (for the law was not infirm by itself, but by the flesh); God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, condemned sin in the flesh, that the justification of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the spirit" (Ibid. v. 4). The solution of the questions is therefore attributed to the grace of God; because Paul does not speak these things of himself, nor does he slander his own freedom, nor does he place himself under sin, nor does he introduce himself as spiritual and carnal; but by the word he displayed, as in an image, man as he was before the law, as he was under the law, and as he was after grace. Then he introduced into knowledge: who was man before the law, who under the law, who after freedom acquired in Christ? God sent his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh.

5. The other question is now resolved.