^4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham has found, who is our father according to the flesh? [n. 322]
^4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he has glory, but not before God. [n. 323]
^4:3 For what says the Scripture? Abraham believed God: and it was reputed to him unto justice. [n. 326]
^4:4 Now to him who works, the reward is not reckoned according to grace but according to debt. [n. 328]
^4:5 But to him who works not, yet believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reputed to justice, according to the purpose of the grace of God.
^4:6 As David also terms the blessedness of a man to whom God reputs justice without works: [n. 332]
^4:7 Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven: and whose sins are covered.
^4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord has not imputed sin.
^4:9 This blessedness then, does it remain in the circumcision only or in the uncircumcision also? For we say that unto Abraham faith was reputed to justice. [n. 339]
^4:10 How then was it reputed? When he was in circumcision or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.

322. After excluding the glory which the Jews took in the law, on the basis of which they preferred themselves to the gentiles, the Apostle now excludes their glory in regard to circumcision.

About this he does two things.

First, he takes up the question he had raised earlier, when he asked, what is the profit of circumcision? (Rom 3:1). And because Abraham was the first to receive the command about circumcision, as stated in Genesis (Gen 17:10), he repeats the question in the person of Abraham himself, saying: if it is true that God justifies the uncircumcised as well as the circumcised, what profit shall we say then that Abraham has found, who is our father according to the flesh? That is, according to circumcision and other bodily observances. For it does not seem fitting to say that he found no usefulness, since it is stated in Isaiah, I am the Lord, your God, who teaches you useful things (Isa 48:17).

323. Second, when he says, for if Abraham, he answers the question he had raised.

He does two things.

First, he shows that Abraham did not obtain justification through circumcision and the other works of the law, but rather through faith;

second, he commends his faith, at who against hope (Rom 4:18).

In regard to the first he does two things.

First, he explains his position with a reason based on divine acceptance;

second, by reason of God’s promise, at for not through the law (Rom 4:13).

In regard to the first he does three things.

First, he proposes a conditional statement;

second, he disproves the consequent, at for what says the Scripture?

Third, he proves the conditional statement, at as David also.

324. In regard to the first the Apostle intends to argue in the following manner: if Abraham were justified from works of the law, he would have no glory with God; therefore, he was not justified from works.

Hence, he presents the conditional statement, saying: it has been asked what Abraham found in virtue of bodily circumcision, and it is obvious that he did not find himself justified from works of the law, such that his justice consisted in the works of the law; he has glory, namely, before men, who see the outward works, but not before God, who sees in secret: the Lord looks on the heart (1 Sam 16:7); so let no one boast of men (1 Cor 3:21). Hence it is written against some that they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God (John 12:43).

325. Against this one might object that becoming accustomed to outward works generates an inward habit, according to which a man’s heart is also well disposed and so made ready to perform well and take pleasure in good works, as the Philosopher teaches in Ethics II.

The answer is that this takes place in human justice, through which man is ordained to the human good. For the habit of this justice can be acquired through human works, but the justice which obtains glory before God is ordained to the divine good, namely future glory, which exceeds human ability, as is said: it has not arisen in the heart of man what God has prepared for those who love him (1 Cor 2:9).

Consequently, a man’s works are not proportioned to causing the habit of this justice; rather, a man’s heart needs first to be justified inwardly by God, so that he can perform works proportioned to divine glory.

326. Then when he says, for what says, he disproves the consequent, which was negative, by proving the opposite affirmative, namely, that Abraham did have glory before God.

He proves this on the authority of Scripture:

first, he cites the authority;

second, he explains, at now to him.

327. First, therefore, he says: I say that Abraham was justified in a way that gave him glory before God. For what says the Scripture? Abraham believed God who promised that his seed would be multiplied (Gen 15:6). Believe God and he will help you (Sir 2:6). And it was reputed to him, i.e., by God, unto justice: was not Abraham found faithful when tested? (1 Macc 2:52). Consequently, it is clear that before God, by whom that he believed was reckoned to him as justice, he has glory.

But it should be noted that Abraham expressed the justice described, which God regards, not in some outward work but in the inward faith of the heart, which God alone sees. Indeed, since the act of faith is said to be threefold, namely, to believe in God, to believe God, and to believe unto God, he mentions this act, namely to believe God, which is the proper act of faith and indicates its nature. For to believe unto God shows the ordering of faith to its end, which is through charity; for to believe unto God is to go to God by believing, which charity does. Consequently, it follows upon the nature of faith.

But to believe in God indicates the matter of faith taken as a theological virtue, having God for its object. Consequently, this act does not yet attain the nature of faith, because if one believes in God in virtue of certain human reasons and natural signs, he is not yet said to have the faith of which we now speak, but only when he believes something for the reason that it was said by God—which is indicated by the phrase, ‘to believe God.’ It is from this that faith takes its nature, just as any cognitive habit takes its nature from the reason in virtue of which it assents to something. For a person possessing scientific philosophical knowledge is inclined to assent to its statements for one reason, namely, through demonstration, but one having the habit of opinion is inclined to assent for a different reason, namely, through a dialectical syllogism.

328. Then, when he says, now to him who works, he explains the aforementioned biblical citation as regards the words it was reputed to him as justice.

Two explanations of these words are given in the Gloss. In the first explanation they are linked to the final reward, concerning which

first, he shows how it is related to works;

second, how it is related to faith, at but to him who works not.

329. First, therefore, he says that to him who works the works of justice, the reward of eternal recompense—concerning which it is said, behold his reward is with him (Isa 40:10)—is not reckoned as a gift only, but according to debt: did you not agree with me for a denarius? (Matt 20:13).

But on the contrary it is stated below: the grace of God is life everlasting (Rom 6:23), and again: the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come (Rom 8:18). Therefore, that reward is not made as due, but as a gift.

The answer is that human works can be considered in two ways. In one way, according to the substance of the works, and considered this way they do not have anything deserving that the reward of eternal glory should be given.

In another way, they can be considered according to their source, namely, insofar as they are performed under God’s impulse in accord with the intention of God who predestines. And in this respect the aforesaid reward is due them by debt, because, as is stated below: for whosoever are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God . . . and if sons, heirs also (Rom 8:14, 17).

330. Then when he says but to him, he shows how the eternal reward is related to faith, saying, but to him who works not outward works, for example, because he does not have time to work, as in the case of one who dies immediately after baptism, yet believes in him who justifies the ungodly, namely, in God, of whom he says below: God is he who justifies (Rom 8:33), his faith is reputed, i.e., faith alone without outward works, to justice, so that in virtue of it he is called just and receives the reward of justice, just as if he had done the works of justice, as he says below: with the heart, we believe unto justice (Rom 10:10), and this according to the purpose of the grace of God, i.e., accordingly as God proposes to save men gratuitously: to such as, according to his purpose, are called to be saints (Rom 8:28); he accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will (Eph 1:11).

331. Another explanation refers those words to man’s justification.

He says therefore, to him who works, i.e., if anyone be justified by works, the justice would be reckoned as a reward, not according to grace, but according to debt: and if by grace, it is not now by works; otherwise grace is no more grace (Rom 11:6). But to him who works not, so as to be justified by his works, yet believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reputed to justice, according to the purpose of the grace of God, not that he merits justice through faith, but because the believing itself is the first act of the justice God works in him. For from the fact that he believes in God justifying, he submits himself to his justification and thus receives its effect.

This is the literal explanation and accords with the intention of the Apostle, who lays special stress on the words, it was reputed to him as justice (Gen 15:6), a saying which is used when that which is lacking on someone’s part is reckoned to him gratis, as if he had accomplished the whole.

That is why the Apostle says that such reckoning would have no place, if justice were from works, but only as it is from faith.

332. Then when he says, as David also, he proves the conditional statement by a quotation from a psalm.

First, he gives its sense;

second, he presents its words, at blessed are they;

third, he excludes a false interpretation, at this blessedness, then.

333. He says: as David also terms the blessedness of a man to whom God reputes, i.e., confers, justice without works, i.e., gratis, without preceding works: not because of deeds done by us in justice (Titus 3:5).

But man’s blessedness is from God, as the Psalm says: blessed is the man who makes the Lord his hope (Ps 40:5). Hence, it is plain that he has glory before God who is justified not by the works of the law, as has been said.

334. Then when he says, blessed are they, he presents David’s words containing the previous judgment and says that those whose sins are forgiven are blessed; consequently, they did not previously have good works, from which they obtained justice or happiness.

335. But sin is divided into three classes: original, actual mortal, and actual venial.

First, in regard to original sin he says: blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven.

Here it should be noted that original sin is called iniquity, because it is the lack of that original justice, by which in equity man’s reason was subject to God, the lower powers to reason, and the body to the soul. This equity is removed by original sin, because after reason ceased to be subject to God, the lower powers rebel against reason and the body is withdrawn from obedience to the soul and subjected to decay and death. Hence: I was brought forth in iniquities (Ps 51:5).

In both texts original sin is presented in the plural, either because of the multitude of men in whom original sin is multiplied or better because it virtually contains within itself all sins in some way.

Such original sin is said to be forgiven, because the state of guilt passes with the coming of grace, but the effect remains in the form of fomes, or concupiscence, which is not entirely taken away in this life, but is remitted or mitigated.

336. Second, in regard to actual mortal sin he says, and whose sins are covered.

For sins are said to be covered from the divine gaze, inasmuch as he does not look upon them to be punished: you covered all their sin (Ps 84:3).

337. Third, in regard to venial sin he says, blessed is the man to whom the Lord has not imputed sin, where sin refers to venial sins which, although light, if they be many, man is separated and distant from God: the good Lord will pardon everyone who sets his heart to seek God, even though not according to the sanctuary’s rules of cleanness (2 Chr 30:18).

338. These three can be distinguished in another way.

For in sin are three things, one of which is offense against God. In regard to this he says, blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, the way man is said to remit an offense committed against him: her iniquity is pardoned (Isa 40:2).

The second thing is the fact that the disordered deed has been done and cannot be said not to have occurred, once it has been perpetrated; but it is covered over by the hand of God’s mercy and is held as if not committed.

The third is the debt of punishment, in regard to which he says, blessed is the man to whom the Lord has not imputed sin, i.e., unto punishment.

339. Then when he says, this blessedness then, he excludes a false interpretation of the text.

For a Jew could interpret it as meaning that the grace of forgiveness of sins is conferred only on the circumcised.

Therefore, to exclude this the Apostle first raises the question, this blessedness then, by which God confers justice without works, does it remain in the circumcised only, i.e., does it affect only the circumcised, or in the uncircumcision also, i.e., on the gentiles? Plainly it is for both, according to what he says below: the same Lord is riches unto all that call upon him (Rom 10:12).

Second, at for we say, to show this he appeals to the authority of Scripture (Gen 15:6), as if to say: I ask this, for we say that unto Abraham faith was reputed to justice.

Third, from this text he concludes to the answer, although he states it in the form of a question: how then was it reputed to him, namely, Abraham’s faith as justice; that is, when he was in circumcision, i.e., when he was circumcised, or in uncircumcision, i.e., when still uncircumcised?

340. He answers: not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. This is obvious from the reported sequence of events. For Genesis reports that faith was reckoned to Abraham as justice (Gen 15:6), but the fact of receiving circumcision is not recorded until Genesis (17:23 et seq.). Therefore, if Abraham, still uncircumcised, was justified by faith, it is plain that the justice of faith, through which sins are forgiven gratis, occurs not only in circumcision but also in uncircumcision, i.e., in gentiles.