Abraham were juftified by works, he hath whereof to glory before God. Becaufe, be bath nothing to glory of before God. By which we fee, there is a third propofition, which the apoftle concealed, but which must neceffarily be fupplied, which is this conclufion, because Abraham was not juftified by his works. As the folution of the queftion depends on this propofition, and on the proofs, which establish it, the three propofitions must be treated separately, 1. Every man, who is juftified by works, hath whereof to glory before God. 2. Abraham, what advantages foever he had otherwife, had nothing to glory of before God. 3. The conclufion fuppreffed, because Abraham was not juftified by his works. (5) (5) This verfe is differently understood by expofitors of equal learning. Mr. Claude's fenfe of the paffage is very probable; and others, who expound the verfe differently, bring it to the fame meaning. Slichtingius tranfpofes the words, and, according to his reafoning, they read thus, What shall we fay then, that Abraham, who is our father after the flesh, hath found? Hæc verba, fecundum carnem, refpiciunt ad verba patrem noftrum. Significat apoftolus Abrahamum effe quidem patrem Judæorum, fed fecundum carnem, quatenus carnali ratione ex illo orti funt, &c. Slichtingii com. in loc. Our Hammond denies this conftruction, and the learned Le Clerc reads the paffage thus, What shall we fay then? VOL. I. There that Abraham our father bath found [xag grace] according to the flesh that is, in the judgment of man, or according to a carnal judgment. --If Abraham was justified by works, if he was accounted juft for his works, nala cagna, καλα σαρία, in the judgment of men, he bath whereof to glory, viz. πgus Try oagna, before men: but not before God, an OU TROS TOU Osov. Le Clerc's fupplement to Hammond's annot. in loc. Our author thinks, there is a propofition concealed, a mode of fpeaking, called by rhetoricians an apofiopefis. Mr. Saurin gives two examples of the fame kind : Prov. xxii. 2. The rich and the poor meet together, the Lord is the maker of them all. This propofition, the Lord is the maker of them all, is one of There are texts of reafoning, which are compofed of an objection and the answer, and the divifion of fuch is plain; for they naturally divide thofe concife, and in fome fort, defective propofitions, which a judicious reader mut fupply. The ftyle is common in fcripture, it is peculiarly proper in fententious works, fuch as the book of Proverbs. Solomon's defign is to teach us, that, notwithstanding the great diverfity of conditions in fociety, the men, who compofe it, are effentially equal. The reason, that he alledges, is, the Lord hath made them all. Unless we add to this what is wanting, it proves nothing at all. It does not follow, that two beings, which have the fame God for their author, have for that reafon any refemblance, much lefs that they are equal. Is not God the author of thofe intelligences, who are not clothed with mortal flesh,and who have faculties above men? Is not God the author of their exiftence? Because God hath made them all, does it follow, that thefe two forts of beings are equal? The fame God is no lefs the author of an ant, than of the moft fublime genius among men but does it follow, becaufe the Lord hath made that ant, and this fublime genius, that thefe two beings are equal? The understanding of Solomon's words then depends on what the wife reader jupplies. into We may judge what ought to be fupplied, by the nature of the thing, and by a parallel paffage in Job xxxi. 15. Did nos be, that made me in the womb, make him? and did not one fashion us in the womb? He hath formed us all the fame, this must be fupplied to our text, the Lord is the maker of them all. Nothing but a fund of ignorance or wickedness will induce a man to abuse the liberty of fupplying, and to conclude, that he may add to a text whatever appears moft proper to favour the opinion, which he would defend, or the paflion, that he would preferve. When we fearch truth, it is easy to discover in what texts the author uses this fort of figurative style. We may place in this rank all thofe, which do not give diftinct ideas, or which convey ideas oppofite to the speaker's defign, at least unlefs we make the supplement. For example, 2 Cor. xi. 4For if he, that cometh, preachcth another Jefus, whom we bave not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gofpel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. If we affix to thefe words the ideas, which at first fight offer, we should take the text into the objection and the solution. As Rom. vi. 1, 2. What shall we fay then, fhall we continue in fin, that grace may abound? God forbid: how shall we, that are dead to fin, live any longer therein? Divide this into two parts, the objection, and the anfwer. (6) The objection is, first, propofed in general terms, what shall we fay then? 2. In more particular terms, fhall we continue in Jin? And 3. The reafon and ground of the objection, becaufe grace abounds. The folution of the question is the fame. In general, God forbid. In particular, how fhall we live in fin? And the reafon, we are dead to fin. There are fome texts of reafoning, which are extremely difficult to divide, because they cannot in a fenfe directly oppofite to the apostle's. S. Paul defired the Corinthians to refpect his ministry, and to regard his apoftleship as confirmed of God, in a manner as noble and glorious, as that of any minister, who had been with them. What does the propofition, which we have read, make for the apostle's defign, if we do not fupply what is not expreffed? But if we fupply what is understood, if we fupply these words, or others equivalent, this is not to be supposed; we fhall perceive the folidity of his reafoning, which comes to this. If you have had among you any one, by whofe ministry you have known a redeemer more proper to heal your maJadies than him, whom we have preached to you; or if you have received more excellent 'be gifts by him than those, which the holy Spirit fhed on you fo abundantly by my ministry, you would do well to prefer that teacher before me but this it is not to be supposed that you have had fuch teachers: you ought then to respect my ministry. Saurin fer. tom. vi. f. 8. fur l'egalité des hommes. (6) The text is an objection, and an answer. Eft prolepfis, qua apoftolus occurrit quorundam objectioni. Dicet enim quis, fi, o Paule! verum eft, quod dixifti cap. fuperiori in fine, ubi abundavit delictum, ibi fuperabundavit et gratia; ergo peccata peccatis addenda funt, ut gratia Dei magis abundet. Refpondet Paulus, abfit, ita patres! Unde patet, peccatum hic proprie accipi licet aliqui metonymice pro fomite peccati accipiant. Corn. à Lapide com. in loc. be reduced into many propofitions without confufion, or favouring too much of the fchools, or having a defect in the divifion; in short, without being unfatisfactory. In fuch a cafe, let ingenuity and good fenfe contrive fome extraordinary way, which, if proper and agreeable, cannot fail of producing a good effect. For example, John iv. 10. If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that faith to thee, Give me to drink, thou wouldeft have afked of him, and he would have given thee living water: I think it might not be improper to divide into two parts, the firft including the general propofitions contained in the words, and the fecond, the particular application of these to the Samaritan woman. In the first, obferve these following propofitions : That Jefus Chrift is the gift of God. (7)-That though he asked for drink, he is the fountain of living water himself.-That he is the object of our knowledge, both as the gift of God, and as the fount of living water.-That an application to him for this living water, flows from our knowledge of him. That he gives the water of life to all, who afk it. In the fecond part you may observe, that Jefus Chrift did not difdain to converse with (7) Jefus Chrift is the gift of God. Donum Dei intelligunt Auguftinus, Rupert, Beda, et Strabus, Latinique fere omnes Spiritum fan&tum, quem poftea aquam vivam vocari putant, et aquæ illi opponi, de qua mulier Chriftum loqui intelligebat, ut ait cap. vii. 38, 39. Chryfoftomus, Cyrillus, Theoph. Euth, generaliter intelligunt donum Dei, id eft, quidquid Deus poteft, aut folet dare, ut donum Dei dono hominis, id eft, aquæ quam mulier illi donare poterat, opponant. Alii feipfum donum Dei vocaffe putant; quafi dixerit, fi fcires quantum hominibus donum præftiterit Deus, quod me ad eos miferit, et quis ego fim, qui ab eo miffus fum, ac tecum loquor, tu aliam a me aquam poftulares. This feems to be the fenfe of the words. Maldonat. com. in loc. with a woman, (8) a Samaritan woman, a fchifmatic, (9) out of the communion of the vifible church, a very wicked woman, a woman, who in her fchifm and fin difputed against the truth.-That Jefus Chrift (8) Jefus Chrift converfed with a woman. This converfation furprized the apoffles; for it was contrary to the custom of the Jewish rabbies. Sapientes hoc damnant, imo prohibent; unde in libro Aboth, cap. i. Jofes, filius Jochanan, Hierofolymitanus dicit, Ne multiplica fermonem cum fæmina. Id commentator enarrat non folum de aliena; fed etiam de propria. Drufii præterit. lib. iv. in loc. (9) Jefus Chrift converfed with a fchifmatic. Our Lord gives us then an example of that kind of treatment, which heretics and fchifmatics have a right to expect from us. How contrary this to the practice of fuperftitious Jews, and perfecuting chriftians! The Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans. Quin obviis dicebant ne attingite---odium ex religione natum. The claiming, Touch me not, the other crying, Don't touch me, you are unclean. This odium prevailed in other places, if we believe Drufius. Quod illi quoque faciebant, qui in infula quadam maris rubri habitabant, ut liquet ex geographo Arabe, qui penes me. Druf. in loc. fupra citato, et in annot. in Marc. ix. 53. A Jefuit expofitor exhorts chriftians to imitate the Jews in this diftant referve, because it is more dangerous for chriftians to converfe with heretics, than with heathens and Mohammedans. Utinam tam diligenter catholici nunc hæreticorum confuetudinem vitarent, quam Judæi Samaritanorum confortium etiam in rebus nihili fugiebant. Certe periculofius eft cum hæreticis quam cum Samaritanis, quam cum gentilibus, aut Mahummetanis agere. Maldonat. in loc. The readieft way to make heretics, is to make creeds, as the bishop of Coloffe argued in the fixth feffion of the council of Florence. Si non liceret per expofitionem aliquid ad dogmata fidei fuperaddere, nulla ratione hærefes impugnari, et extirpari poffent. Quare cum hac de caufa Con Samaritans were not behind them, for, as Drufius properly adds, the Samaritans had no dealings with the Jews. Etiam tactum occurrentis Judæi abhorrebant. Itaque dicebant obviam facto, ne tetigeris me, immundus enim es. It must have been a curious fpectacle to fee the meeting of a Jew and a Samaritan in a narrow pafs, the one ex-antinopolitanum Nicæno, et |