The Practical Theme: The calling of the Roman Christians, on the ground of their accomplished redemption, or the universal mercy of God (which will be extended to all), to represent the living worship of God in the completion of the real burnt-offering, and to form a universal Christian church-life for the realization of the call of all nations to praise and glorify God, so that they too may recognize and sustain the universal call of the Apostle. In correspondence with this is the recommendation of his companions, assistants, and friends, in sending his greetings to them; in contrast with which is his warning against Judaizing and paganizing false teachers; Rom_12:1 to Rom_16:20.—Conclusion. Salutations of friends. Amen (Rom_12:21-21).
Literature.—Borger, Dissertatio de parte epistolœ ad Romanos parœnetica. Lugd. Bat., 1810.
FIRST DIVISION
THE CALLING OF THE ROMAN CHURCH TO A UNIVERSAL CHRISTIAN DEPORTMENT
Rom_12:1 to Rom_15:13
First Section.—The practical theme (Rom_12:1-2). The proper conduct of Christians toward the fellowship of the brethren for the establishment of a harmonious church-life (Rom_12:3-8).
Rom_12:1-8
1I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye [to] present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable [well-pleasing] unto God, which is your reasonable [rational] service. [,] 2And be not [And not to be] conformed to this world: but be ye transformed [but to be transfigured] by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God [or, what is the will of God, what is good, and well-pleasing, and perfect].
3For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly [or, not to be high-minded above what he ought to be minded, but to be so minded as to be sober-minded], according as God hath dealt to every manthe measure of faith. 4For as we have many members in one body, and all5members have not the same office: So we, being many, are one body in Christ,and every one members one of another. 6Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according7to the proportion of faith; Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he that teacheth, on teaching; 8Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness.
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Summary.—The practical theme controlling the whole of the second part. The proper conduct of Christians, or the calling of (Roman) Christians to the living worship (service) of God,Rom_12:1-2; a. The proper conduct toward the fellowship of believing brethren, the Church (ecclesiastical duties), Rom_12:3-8; b. The proper conduct of Christians in all personal relations, Rom_12:9-21; c. Toward civil authorities (duties toward the government), Rom_13:1-6; d. Toward the world in general. Recognition of the rights of the world, and of legal fellowship with it. Separation, on the contrary, from the ungodliness of the world, Rom_12:7-14; e. The proper practice of the living worship of God, and its universality in the removing of the differences between the “weak” and the “strong,” Rom_14:1 to Rom_15:4; f. Exhortation to unanimity of all the members of the Church to the praise of God, on the ground of God’s grace, for realizing the destination of all nations to glorify God, Rom_15:5-13.
See also the headings of the sections. Meyer: “General exhortation to holiness.” But this “general” exhortation is very characteristically defined according to the characteristic, fundamental thought of the whole Epistle, in its essential as well as in its personal reference. According to the essential reference, the Apostle has shown, in the first part, that the corruption of the world consists in its having fallen from the living worship of God, and that therefore redemption is a restoration of the fundamental principles of this living worship. The entire holiness of Christians is, accordingly, portrayed as the development of a living spiritual worship. But in the personal reference, the Apostle shows how the Roman Christian congregation should be developed into a congregation of living worship, in order to be the instrument of its extension to all the world, to serve as a central organ for the Apostle, who has perceived his calling in the extension of this worship into all the world.
1. The practical theme (Rom_12:1-2). A summons to develop the service restored by redemption. [Comp. here the third part of the Heidelberg Catechism, On Thankfulness to God for Redemption.—P. S.]
Rom_12:1. I beseech you therefore, brethren[
Ðáñáêáëῶ ïὖí ὑìᾶò
,
ἀäåëöïß
]. According to Meyer and Tholuck, the
ïὖí
does not introduce an inference from the whole of the previous didactic part (as Calvin, Bengel, De Wette, Philippi, and others, would have it), but from Rom_11:35-36. But it must be observed, that the conclusion of chap. 11. constitutes the organic apex of the entire doctrinal division; this is especially true of Rom_11:32, with which Rückert, and others, would connect this verse. Tholuck fails to perceive the Apostle’s practical theme, in saying: “The Apostle was accustomed to make some exhortations follow the chief, and therefore the didactic, contents.”
By the mercies of God [
äéὰ ôῶí ïἰêôéñìῶí ôïῦ Èåïῦ
] (Rom_15:30; 1Co_1:10; 2Co_10:1). The objective ground of Divine mercy in their experience of salvation, is made the subjective ground of his admonition. He refers to the experience of Divine mercy, its consequence, and its light and right, as if he said, by the name of Divine mercy. The only difference is, that, in the asseveration
äéÜ
, by, the speaker allows the subject of his asseveration itself to speak as motive and motor. The plural
ïἰêôéñìïß
corresponds to the Hebrew
øַçֲîִéí
; but the Apostle has also instituted, in the foregoing, a threefold gradation of the Divine demonstration of grace.
To present,
ðáñáóôῆóáé
. The expression, which was used of placing the sacrificial beast before the altar, conveys the thought of the complete resignation and readiness which, on the one hand, does not in the least hesitate, but, on the other, makes no intrusion by an arbitrary slaying of the offering.
Your bodies [
ôὰ óþìáôá ὑìῶí
]. The holding of the body in readiness for an offering well-pleasing to God, is the expression for the highest measure of the renunciation of every thing earthly and temporal. Explanations:
1. Figurative designation of personality itself, according to the figure of the offering (Beza, De Wette, and Philippi [Stuart, Hodge]).
2. The bodies in the real sense, as the holiness of the
íïῦò
is added in the second verse (Fritzsche, Meyer).
3. The sensuous nature of man, which leads him to sin (Köllner, and others).
Against (1): The Apostle speaks, according to the apostolic standard, to believers, who, according to Romans 6 :, have already given their personal life to death. But the body is the organ and symbol of all the individual parts, which must be offered in consequence of this principial offering. Against (2), Cocceius: Non possumus offerre corpus sine anima. The real service performed in making the offering is, indeed, finished with the shedding of blood, or with the resignation of the body. But the heart, or the life of the spirit, is given to God as an expression that the body is offered. Against (3) Whatever is sinful is not fit, as such, for an offering.—The body is the organ and symbol of the present life in all its relations and parts. Comp. Rom_6:12-13, where the question under consideration is the active consecration of all the members of the body.
Sacrifice.
Èõóßáí
. We hold that the Apostle has in mind the symbol of the central offering—that is, of the burnt-offering (comp. Tholuck, p. 651). But the burnt-offering was a symbol that the whole life, with all its powers, should be consumed in the fire of God’s sovereignty, for His service and glory. The predicates, living,
æῶóáí
, &c., particularly the first, which the Apostle ascribes to this
èõóßá
, are thought, by Meyer, to denote the antithesis of this New Testament offering to that of the Old Testament: “as an offering which lives (antithesis to the real offerings which lose their life).” Tholuck, on the other hand, says with propriety: “the thought that in the Old Testament only dead offerings were brought to God, is neither Jewish nor Pauline; to present not only dead offerings, but even sick ones, was an abomination before the Lord; Mai. Rom_1:8.” Yet this applies only to Meyer’s expression; his distinction in itself is well founded. The predicates, holy [
ἁãßáí
] and well-pleasing to God [
åὐÜñåóôïí ôῷ Èåῷ
], do not in themselves fully constitute an antithesis to the Old Testament. The antithesis is comprised: (1) In the designation, your bodies, human bodies; which is necessary to the idea of a spiritual offering; (2) In the emphasis on the presenting and holding in readiness for the Lord, as the Finisher of the real offering; in which all their own external self-offering on the part of the Roman Christians is absolutely precluded. By this means the predicates acquire a stronger meaning. The higher and real newness of life, the holiness of, and Divine pleasure in, the life of faith given up to the service of God, take the place of the symbolical newness of life, holiness of, and legal Divine pleasure in, the offering of the beast. Estius, Bengel, and others, have connected the
ôῷ Èåῷ
with
ðáñáóôῆóáé
; this is correctly opposed by Meyer and Tholuck (see Php_4:18; comp. Rom_6:13; 1Pe_2:5).
Which is your rational service. [Dr. Lange: Euer vernünftiger (geistiger) Gottesdienst.] The accusative
ôὴí ëïãéêὴí ëáôñåßáí
is in apposition with the foregoing clause, characterizing more specifically what has been said, according to the New Testament conception of offering, in antithesis to that of the Old Testament. The
ëáôñåßá
, service, worship, which, in its central idea, is everywhere an offering (see Joh_16:2). But this sacrificial worship of believers should be
ëïãéêÞ
(see Joh_4:21; Rom_1:9; 1Pe_2:5). The
ëïãéêüí
denotes that which is inspired by reason, in harmony with real reason, and consequently spiritual, real; in antithesis to merely external symbolical service (Melanchthon, cultus mentis), but not in antithesis to the
æῶá ἄëïãá
(Theodoret, Grotius, and others); for, as Meyer observes, the question here is
ëáôñåßá
, but not
èõóßá
. Indirectly, indeed, the
ëïãéêὴ ëáôñåßá
is also an antithesis to the cultus commentitii; for if the symbolical service would establish itself beyond its time, against the real service, it would then become cultus commentitius.
Rom_12:2. And not to be conformed. On the difference of the readings, see Textual Note2. The infinitives must be referred to the
ðáñáêáëῶ
. The
óõíó÷çìáôßæåóèáé
is passive, with a reflexive meaning, in eandem formam redigi, se conformare. Philippi: “The original difference between
ó÷ῆìá
and
ìïñöÞ
may be, that the latter denotes rather the organic form, while the former denotes more the mechanical form, the external and adventitious habitus (
ó÷ῆìá
from
ἔ÷ù
,
óêåῖí
); comp. 1Co_7:31. Hence
óêῆìá
is also the external semblance, the pompa, and
óêçìáôßæåóèáé
, synonymous with
ðñïóðïéåῖóèáé
, to assume a form, a seeming shape, to appear, to take the shape of; comp. the passages cited by Wetstein;
ìïñöÞ
also the beautiful form, forma; comp. formosus. Thus
ìïñöÞ
more fitly designates the real inward form, while
ó÷ῆìá
denotes rather the external and accidental appearance.” Comp. Php_2:6-8. See also Tholuck, p. 652. Meyer holds [as the E. V. assumes], that the antithesis of both verbs is comprised only in the prepositions; these, indeed, increase it. The
óýí
denotes the torpidity of the external form of the Church by uniformity with the world, worldliness; the
ìåôÜ
denotes the organic change and transformation of the organic shape, according to the new inward form. Meyer: “The present infinitives denote a continued action, while
ðáñáóôῆóáé
represents the presenting of the offering as a completed act.”
To this world [
ôῶ áἰῶíé ôïýôῳ
].
äַåֶּä òåֹìָí
. The pre-messianic and relatively anti-messianic form of the world in its perverted course. [Comp. Lange’s Comm., Gal_1:4, p. 13.—R.]
But to be transfigured [
ἀëëὰ ìåôáìïñöïῦóèáé
. The difference in preposition and verb is better preserved by transfigured, which also conveys the distinctions suggested above. See Five Anglican Clergymen.—R.] The
ìåôáì
. is reflexive, as
óõíó÷
.
By the renewing of your mind;Rom_7:24; Eph_4:23. The
êáéíüôçò ðíåýìáôïò
(Rom_7:6; comp. Rom_6:4), as an impelling principle, results in the
ἀíáêáßíùóéò
of the
íïῦò
; for the
íïῦò
, the conscious, thoughtful, or reflective moral and religious spiritual life (disposition) is constantly renewed, in part restored, and in part developed, in its mastery over the natural part of life. The transformation and shaping of the life of the Christian are determined not by external worldly forms, but by this inward renewing, or renewing ascending to the whole of the external life (
ἀíáêáßíùóéò
) through the productive power of the Spirit. The
íïῦò
, as such, does not then receive the new
ìïñöÞ
(Tholuck), but rather the whole Christian life from the
íïῦò
outward.
That ye may prove. Literally:
åἰò ôὸ äïêéìÜæåéí
. [Infinitive clause of design (Meyer).—R.] The Christian life should not receive its development by means of an external legislation, but by the inward one, which is directed by spiritual proving and self-determination (see Gal_6:4; Eph_5:10; Php_1:10, and other passages). Meyer appropriately says: “In the unrenewed man this proving is altogether foreign to the activity of his conscience. Comp. Eph_5:10.” But with this there is also connected the being able to prove (Rückert, Köllner [Hodge, apparently]), although the actual proving is conjoined with it. Meyer: “The regenerate one proves by the verdict of his conscience, aroused and illuminated by the Spirit.” The
íüìïò
of the Spirit, the Christian principle of life, is an infinitude, whose explanation and concrete application to life is committed to the proving of Christian illumination and Wisdom 13
The will of God [
ôὸ èÝëçìá ôïῦ Èåïῦ
]. That which is willed by God in every relation of life. The reference of the definitions
ôὸ ἀãáèüí
,
êáὶ åὐÜñåóôïí êáὶ ôÝëåéïí
, as adjectives, to God’s will (Vulgate, Chrysostom, the most of the early expositors, Luther, Rückert, &c.), is opposed, first of all, by the
åὐÜñåóôïí
, but, in general, by the tautology that would be contained in the expression. Therefore Erasmus, Castalio, Tholuck, Meyer, and the most of the early commentators, have regarded the additions as a substantive apposition.
What is good, &c. We may ask whether a climax of three members is designed [Meyer], or whether we should render explicit that double relation of the good, by which, on the one hand, it is that which is well-pleasing to God, and, on the other, that which is perfect in itself, because it arises from the righteousness of faith, the principle of perfection. We prefer the latter rendering. The repetition of the article would, of course, not be necessary with the first interpretation.
2. The proper conduct of Christians toward the community of brethren for the establishment of a harmonious church-life (Rom_12:3-8). Tholuck is correct in finding, in what follows, a reference to the different spheres of activity in the Church. Meyer speaks only of an exhortation to individual duties.
Rom_12:3. For I say (say definitely). The
ãÜñ
is rendered namely, by Tholuck and Meyer. [Alford also takes it as resumptive.] First of all, namely appears as inappropriate as for. If it is the matter of the self-proving and self-determination of believers, how they should act toward each other, how can the Apostle lay down his precepts immediately afterward? The answer lies in the fact, that their subjective judgment should be subordinated to the known objective will of God. This requirement, that they should be certain as to whether their conduct corresponds to God’s perfect will, is so great, that it causes the Apostle to lay down regulations for it. Therefore we may also translate the
ãÜñ
by for. The
ëÝãåéí
is used in the sense of injunction.
Through the grace, &c. [
äéὰ ôῆò ÷Üñéôïò
,
ê
.
ô
.
ë
.] Even here
äéÜ
. He will not prescribe for them by virtue of his subjective opinion or authority, but by virtue of the grace which is given to him (see Rom_1:5), which establishes his office, and is at the same time the element of life common to his office and their church-life (see Rom_15:15; 1Co_3:10; Eph_3:7-8).
To every man that is among you [
ðáíôὶ ôῶ ὄíôé ἐí ὑìῖí
. Alford: “A strong bringing out of the individual application of the precept.”—R.] This would therefore have applied to Peter also, if he had been in Rome, or Paul would not have spoken thus, or, indeed, would not have written to them at all.
Not to think of himself [
ìὴ ὑðåñöñïíåῖí
. See the text, and Textual Note6.—R.] Tholuck:
öñïíåῖí
is here not “to strive after,” and also not “to be disposed, to think,” but “to think (of himself)” (see p. 654).
Soberly,
óùöñïíåῖí
. It is wise conduct or good behavior, especially as moderation.—Proper self-knowledge and esteem, apart from over-estimation, should, by modesty, come to proper and wise moderation in the reciprocity of the personal life with the society. Meyer understands
öñïíåῖí
as to be disposed, and explains the details accordingly; the Vulgate, Calvin, and others, interpret in the same way. The mode of thinking and feeling is undoubtedly connected here with the holding and demeaning, which is proved by the
óùöñïíåῖí
.
According as God hath dealt to every man [
ἑêÜóôῳ ὡò ὁ èåὸò ἐìÝñéóåí
]. The
ἑêÜóôῳ
is dependent on
ἑìÝñéóå
: According as God hath dealt to every man, &c., is therefore made antecedent by inversion (see 1Co_3:5).—The idea of a different distribution of the measure of faith leads to the idea of the gift (Rom_12:6). No one should apply more than the gift of grace, for what lies beyond this is presumption; but the whole of the gift of grace should be applied, for if this be not done, something would be withheld from the society which is designed for it. Comp. 1Co_12:4-6; 1Co_12:11; Heb_2:4.
The measure of faith [
ìÝôñïí ðßóôåùò
]. When Meyer maintains that faith here means only faith in the ordinary sense, he overlooks the fact that the measure of faith is spoken of in concrete unity; or rather, he interprets this measure erroneously, by understanding only different degrees of the strength of faith, and, accordingly, he not only rejects the reference of the expression to Christian knowledge (Beza, and others), or to the power of working miracles (Theophylact), but also to the gift of grace (Chrysostom, and most other commentators). The purely Divine element in the gift is undoubtedly emphasized here, for what is not of faith is sin. [Alford explains the phrase: “The receptivity of
÷áñßóìáôá
, itself no inherent congruity. It is, in fact, the subjective designation of ‘the grace that is given unto us;’ Rom_12:6.” He rightly distinguishes it from the gifts and graces themselves. So Philippi in substance. The objective sense of “faith,” which is implied in the view of Beza, is open to decided objection.—R.]
Rom_12:4. For as we have many members in one body [
êáèÜðåñ ãÜñ ἐí ἑíὶ óþìáôä
ðïëëὰ ìÝëç ἔ÷ïìåí
]. Establishment of the foregoing. The individual Christian is only a member of Christ’s body, and should conduct himself as a member, avow himself as a member, and should permit himself to be strengthened as a member; Christ alone is the Head. “On the commonness of the parallels between a human body and a corpus sociale (1 Corinthians 12), even among the ancients, see Grotius and Wetstein in loco;” Meyer.
Rom_12:5. So we, being many. In antithesis to the unity of the body.
In Christ. The head is the organic vital centre of the whole, in which (not to which) every thing in respect to dominion and glory is comprised (Eph_1:22, and other passages).
And every one.
Ôὸ äὲ êáè
̓
åἷò
is a solecism of the later Greek, instead of
ôὸ äὲ êáè
̓
ἕíá
; Mar_14:19; Joh_8:9, and other passages.
Rom_12:6. Having then gifts differing according to the grace [
ἕ÷ïíôåò äὲ ÷áñßóìáôá êáôὰ ôὴí ÷Üñéí ôὴí äïèåῖóáí ἡìῖí äéÜöïñá
]. Different constructions here enter into consideration.
1. With
ἔ÷ïíôåò
a new sentence begins, which continues in a succession of elliptical exhortations (Beza, Olshausen, Philippi, and others). Meyer: “The elliptical expression after
êáôὰ ôὴí ἀíáë
.
ô
.
ðßóô
. may be supplied by
ðñïöçôåýùìå
; by
ὦìåí
after
ἐí ôῇ äéáêïíßᾳ
by
ἔóôù
after
ἐí ôῆ äéäáóêáëßᾳ
; by the same after
ἐí ôῇ ðáñáêÞóåé
; and, finally, by the imperatives of the corresponding verbs (
ìåôáäéäüôù
, &c.) after the three following parts,
ἐí ἁðëüôçôé
, &c. [So E. V., Hodge, &c.] Comp. the analogous mode of expression in 1Pe_4:10 f.
2. The
ἔ÷ïíôåò
is connected with the foregoing, but in such a way that the following clauses are, according to Meyer, all ellipses (Erasmus, and others). Meyer also places Tholuck here, but Tholuck declares now for (1).
3. The
ἔ÷ïíôåò äὲ
is joined with
ἐóìåí
(Rom_12:5), in appositional meaning, and the following clauses are, at the outset, not hortatory, but descriptive, yet pass over into the hortatory (Reiche, Rückert, De Wette, Lachmann). We accept this construction with the modification, that we construe the
ἔ÷åéí
emphatically in the meaning of to have and to hold fast, to put into practice, to exercise. Comp. Rom_1:28. With the gifts, as with every thing spiritual, we must bear especially in mind that they cannot be possessed aright without exercising them. Thus the hortatory character under the descriptive form lies in the force of the
ἔ÷åéí
, and in the added
äÝ
. [This
äÝ
is rendered by Alford: “and not only so, but.”—R.]
As for the apparent fluctuations in the construction, they resolve themselves into regular forms, if we observe the subdivisions, The Apostle distinguishes, first of all, two principal categories: a.
ðñïöçôåßá
; b.
äéáêïíßá
. The
äéáêïíßá
is then divided into the
äéäÜóêùí
and the
ðñáéêáëῶí
; this latter is again divided into the
ìåôáäéäïýò
, the
ðñïúóôÜìåíïò
, and the
ἐëåῶí
. This is proved by the forms:
1. The antithesis of the abstract nouns,
ðñïöçôåßá
and
äéáêïíßá
. The latter, in its broader meaning, was evidently a church office; while, on the other hand, the
ðñïöçôåßá
was, in the fullest sense, also an office.
2.
åἴôå ὁ äéäÜóêùí
,
åἴôå ὁ ðáñáêáëῶí
. This
ðáñáêáëῶí
must, at all events, be regarded as a superintendent of the society, presbyter, or man having the gifts of the presbyter, whether, as
ὁ ìåôáäéäïýò
, he devoted himself to the care of the poor; as
ὁ ðñïúóôÜìåíïò
, to the
êõâÝñíçóéò
, in the narrower sense; or, as
ὁ ἐëåῶí
, to the healing of the sick and casting out of devils.—Gifts differing according to the grace. Gifts; that is, modifications of the one Divine grace in the differences of the human individual talent (see 1Co_12:4 ff.).
Whether prophecy. Prophecy, in the Old Testament as well as in the New, is the gift and calling to declare, by the prompting and communication of God’s Spirit, what is new—that which concerns the future, and the development of God’s kingdom; in order, like the compass, to direct aright, in the present, the ship of the kingdom. The reason why it appears more in the foreground in the Old Testament than in the New, is, that the former was the time of expectation and longing, and the latter the time of fulfilment and satisfaction.
According to the proportion (harmony) of faith [
êáôὰ ôὴí ἀíáëïãßáí ôῆò ðßóôåùò
]. The expression defines exactly: according to the relation, the proportion, or harmony of faith; that is, according to the proportion defined by faith. Explanations:
1. Subjective faith, including the measure of faith, is meant (the early commentators; Origen, Chrysostom, Ambrose, and others; Bengel and Meyer [Alford, De Wette]. Tholuck: “The prophet keeps within the limits of his prophetical gift, assigned him by his individuality ”).
2. The objective rule of faith (Abelard, Aquinas, Hervæus, &c.; Flatt, Klee, Philippi, and others). Tholuck, on the contrary, observes, that we may ask whether Paul could have appealed already to such a regula fidei. But, in reality, Moses has already established the features of the analogia fidei,Deu_18:18 ff. It is well known that the Jews crucified Christ by a false application of this rule; but it is equally well known that the New Testament proofs of faith from the Old Testament, which first introduced Christianity into the Jewish world, have only been a living application of this rule. At all events, Paul could not yet appeal to ecclesiastical confessions, but he could appeal to a fundamental canon of truth; see Gal_1:8; Gal_6:16; Php_3:16; 2Ti_3:15-16, &c. However, Tholuck has other grounds for preferring the explanation, that the prophet keeps within the sphere of his calling; namely, because the deacon should remain within the sphere of his diaconate, &c. But is the sphere of the prophet described by the measure of his subjective faith, or would not this be here rather a nugatory generality? The sphere of the prophet, who reveals what is new for the enlargement of the old revelation, is just the real character of the revelation itself, harmonizing with itself through all the stages of development. Yet the Apostle does not say
ἀðïêáëýøåùò
, but
ðßóôåùò
, because the faith of the Church is also called to the office of watchman, in order that the development of the truth be not corrupted by false prophets. The application of this rule to the exposition of the Scriptures in the early period (see Tholuck, p. 664) is not explicatio, but applicatio; but it cannot be denied that this applicatio itself is made
êáôὰ ôὴí ἀíáëïãßáí ôῆò ðßóôåùò
.
Rom_12:7. Or ministry [
åἴôå äéáêïíßáí
, das Dienstamt (Lange). Governed by
ἔ÷ïíôåò
, like the preceding accusative]. A threefold idea of the
äéáêïíßá
can be distinguished in the New Testament. 1. The most comprehensive idea understands by
äéáêïíßá
the ecclesiastical office in general; see 1Co_12:5. There, prophecy is designated as a diaconate; here, it is distinguished from it. 2. Therefore, the special office for a definite congregation. So here. [Dr. Lange apparently includes here all the permanent offices in a single church, as he makes
äéáêïíßá
a category, under which the five following terms fall. If, however, it be considered as coördinate with what follows, then the still more restricted view must be adopted.—R.] 3. The diaconate, in distinction from the presbyterial episcopacy, 1Ti_3:8. At the time when this Epistle was written, the ecclesiastical distinctions were less developed than when the First Epistle to Timothy was written, but yet more so than in the First Epistle to the Corinthians.
Let us wait on our ministering [
ἐí ôῇ äéáêïíßᾳ
. We must supply an imperative, either let us be in, remain in, or wait on (as E. V.). The sense is the same.—R.] Meyer thus explains the
ἐí
: The one who was “diaconally endowed” shall not wish to be of authority beyond the sphere assigned him by this endowment, but to be active within it. But it is not necessary to understand the
åἶíáé ἐí
quantitatively; it can also be understood qualitatively. And since all the apostolic functions of the Church were diaconal, qualitative ministering is undoubtedly the meaning. The proof of the true office is, that it consists simply in service; just as, inversely, pure divine service becomes the true office, even if it had no human official seal. With the positive filling of his sphere, it is always supposed that he does not commit improprieties beyond his sphere.
Or he that teacheth, on teaching [
åἴôå ὁ äéäÜóêùí
,
ἐí ôῇ äéäáóêáëßᾳ
]. According to Meyer, Paul should have continued uniformly,
åἴôå äéäáóêáëßáí
(sc.
ἔ÷ïíôåò
), “as [Cod.] A. actually has.” We have seen, in the arrangement of the gifts (see above), what grounds he had for not thus continuing. Thus he has his gift in his labors as teacher. This appears self-evident; but how many, who would be deemed teachers, are mere babblers!
Rom_12:8. Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation [
ὁ ðáñáêëῶí
,
ἐí ôῇ ðáñáêëÞóåé
]. As the
ðáñáêáëῶí
here is definitely distinguished from the
äéäÜóêùí
, nothing else can be understood by it than a fraction within the more general presbyterate. Evidently the more definite distinction, in 1Ti_5:17, between presbyters who devote themselves to teaching, and ruling presbyters, thus begins to take shape; while, on the other hand, the diaconate is developed in a presbyterate from the date of Act_11:30, and has not yet positively been separated from it. The exhorter, according to what follows, comprises the different sides of the subsequently developed presbyterial office; he is undoubtedly synonymous with the pastors, Eph_4:11. The division of his office appears in the following statements.
He that giveth [
ὁ ìåôáäéäïýò
]. According to Meyer, the official functions to the Church cease with the
åἴôå
. We have, on the contrary, laid down further subdivisions here. Every Christian is indeed a
ìåôáäéääïò
, and not less an
ἐëåῶí
; but as here there stands midway between the two a
ðñïúóôÜìåíïò
, which not every one can be, special functions recognized by the Church are evidently meant. Meyer argues against such functions, by observing: a. The diaconal gift could not be thus analyzed; b. The position of the
ðñïúóôÜìåíïò
as the presbyter between two deaconal employments, would be inappropriate. Instead, therefore, of bearing in mind the growing relations, he does violence to them by preconceived opinions; a presbyter is a presbyter, a deacon is a deacon, &c.; and then, according to him, Paul casts the presbyter right in the midst of the membership.
With simplicity. This term is characteristic of the penetration of the Apostle, since accessory views might be easily connected with all exercise of beneficence.
He that ruleth,
ðñïúóôÜìåíïò
. According to Meyer, the presbyter, but not the presbyter exclusively. See 1Co_12:28. The order there laid down by the apostles is as follows: 1. Prophets; 2. Teachers; 3. Miraculous powers; then healing of the sick, then bestowals of help, then
êõâåñíÞóåéò
, and finally
ãÝíç ãëùóóῶí
. Therefore the bestowals of help would thus fall under the rubric of the present
ðáñáêáëῶí
, and especially of the
ìåôáäéäïýò
. Undoubtedly the
êõâåñíÞóåéò
there stands in the same line with the
ðñïúóôÜìåíïò
here. The ones concerned as having care of the external affairs of the Church, had, at the beginning, no great things to manage. We then find the parallel of the
ἐëåῶí
in the gift of specific miracles: the healing of those possessed with devils, and the restoration of the sick.
With diligence.
ÓðïõäÞ
may mean haste, zeal, or diligence. But the latter idea is most definite; zeal was a common duty of all.
With cheerfulness [
ἐí ἱëáñüôçôí
, i. e., hilarity]. “With gladness and friendliness,” says Meyer, “the opposite of unwilling and ill-humored behavior.” But the question here is not a conventional good conduct, but that cheerfulness from heaven which, in a despondent world, among other duties, must conquer and banish the demons of sadness.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. On Rom_12:1 ff. As man’s ideal destination was to perceive God aright in His works, and to praise and glorify Him, and, accordingly, the fall consisted in the omission of this living worship, according to Rom_1:20-21; then, as human corruption consisted fundamentally in the false worship of heathen idolatry and of Jewish zeal for the letter, according to chaps. 1. and 2.; as, further, redemption was instituted that God might effect and manifest the real atonement in Christ as the mercy-seat of the Holy of Holies sprinkled with His own blood, according to Rom_3:25; as then, consequently, also Christian saving faith consisted (according to Rom_5:1-2) of free access to God into the Holy of Holies, and is developed in the most varied features of a New Testament call to worship; so, according to the practical part of this Epistle, should believers begin the development of their worship (Rom_12:1), by finishing the real burnt-offering by the pure presentation of their own bodily life to God’s service. On the passages of heathen and Jewish wise men relating to the moral consecration to God as a self-offering, quoted in Wetstein and Koppe, see Meyer, p. 453. See the same author on the “rational service,” p. 453; Tholuck, p. 651 ff.; Philippi, p. 500. It is noteworthy that the “rational service” is recommended to the Roman Church. On the
óõó÷çìáôßæóèáé
and
ìåôáìïñöïῦóèáé
, see the Exeg. Notes. On
áἰὼí ïὗôïò
, see Philippi, p. 202.
2. Just as the First Epistle of Peter appears as an evangelical prophecy, in opposition to the later false image of Peter, so is it with the Epistle to the Romans; and especially does the expression of the living offering and the reasonable service stand in opposition to the later picture of the life of the Romish Church. The same assertion holds good of the expression with which Paul prescribes for all Christians in Rome, that every one should not think too highly of himself, that we are all members one of another, &c.
3. The first application which the Christian has to make of the principle of his new life is, that he should not arrogantly abuse his charism [gift] in a hierarchical or sectarian way, but should exercise it purely for the service of the Church, by adapting himself to the requirements of the community, and yet preserve his evangelical freedom. The rule is: (1) The whole gift for the Church; (2) Nothing but the gift; see 1 Corinthians 12. On the idea of the charism, see the Exeg. Notes; also Tholuck, p. 655 ff.; p. 661.—The difference between the
ἐëåῶí
and him that giveth, applies to an early period in the Church. The support of the poor brethren in the first period was not the alms of charity. On the disposition and character of the increasing offices in the Church, see the Exeg. Notes. For fuller information on the gifts, see my Gesch. des apostol. Zeitalters, p. 555 ff.; and on the offices, p. 535 ff.
4. The defective understanding, which is still apparent in many ways, in reference to the rule that prophecy is according to the measure of faith, arises from the want of perception of the lawfulness of organic development in the department of spiritual as well as of natural life. With the lawfulness of development there is combined the development of lawfulness in all the spheres of life. But in the ecclesiastical department of faith, many will know nothing of the development expressed in prophecy, and, in contrast to them, many will know nothing of the lawfulness expressed by the measure of faith. Hence arise such foolish, noisy decisions of the day as this: The confessions of the Church are no longer obligatory! Every one must know what is obligatory for him, according to his own conscience and calling. But no one has any right to deny the validity of what the Church of God, in its real development of life, regards as its duty. At all events, it follows most from the Apostle’s rule, that the meaning of confessions is thoroughly dependent on the meaning of the Holy Scriptures. But then it may be asked, whether a legal development has been committed to the Church in its essential and substantial life, or whether the custom of declaiming against the boundless culpability of the Church, now in doctrine and now in life, has arisen because the tradition of bishops’ caps and doctors’ hats is regarded as the most exact history of the Church.
[5. On church polity, as taught in this section. The most remarkable fact is, that so little is said. The doctrines of grace are fully treated; the practical theme is distinctly announced. Then, after an exhortation to humility, comes an exhortation apparently to church officers, yet so indistinct in its distinctions that nothing definite as to the usages of the Roman Church can be based upon it. A warning against the hierarchy of Rome can readily be found in it; but is it not also suggestive of a certain “freedom of adaptation” in the external polity of Christ’s Church? To one who has puzzled over this and parallel passages with the honest purpose of finding out what is the form of church government given jure divino, and failed to discover, in any present form, the counterpart of the apostolic Church, it gives a happy relief from perplexity to conclude that church polity was purposely sketched by the apostles only in “silhouette;” that the details are to be of ecclesiastical rather than of Divine enactment; that, while despotism and anarchy are excluded, both by the nature of the case and the hints given in the New Testament, the external form of the Church of the future may be as different from any organization at present existing, as its spirit will transcend that of mere ecclesiasticism. Mayhap, when the Church shall return to the apostolical spirit, it will find in its outward form the true exegesis of these disputed passages. He who reads prelacy here, reads through colored glasses; and he who finds ruling elders alluded to, must first derive his knowledge of their existence from other sources, and then make his exegesis correspond. If, however, any will not be satisfied until a jure divino form is found, a search into later Epistles will be more profitable; yet that fact of itself admits development in the apostolic age, and who shall say when that development shall cease? Comp. Schaff, History of the Christian Church, i. pp. 130 ff., and the list of authors there referred to; also a discussion on Lay and Primitive Eldership, in the Amer. Presbyterian Review, Drs. R. D. Hitchcock and E. F. Hatfield, vol. vi. pp. 253–268, 506–531.—R.]
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
[In the original, the Homiletical Notes are inserted at the close of the chapter.—R.]
Rom_12:1-2. Our thank-offering for God’s mercy. 1. What sort of a sacrifice should it be? a. Living; b. Holy; c. Well-pleasing to God. 2. With what disposition should it be presented? a. Not so that we should conform to the world, and therefore not with unconverted hearts; but, b. That our minds should be renewed, that we may continually perceive God’s will aright.—Our rational service. 1. The sacrifice which is presented, is not the sacrifice of slain beasts, but the living sacrifice of our bodies. 2. The sanctuary is not the tabernacle or temple, but the Church of our Lord Jesus Christ. 3. The priests are not Levites, but all believing Christians whose mind is renewed.—The restoration of rational service was a prime advantage conferred by our Reformers.—How rational service, in conformity with its nature, should not be limited to the celebration of Sundays and holy days, but should embrace the whole life.—The exhortation to rational service is still necessary. 1. In opposition to the Catholic Church; 2. In opposition to certain sects.—Paul exhorts to reasonable worship, but not to the worship of reason.—Reasonable service is not subtilizing service. 1. The former is living and inspiring; 2. The latter, dead and cold.
Luther: St. Paul here calls all offerings, works, and worship, unreasonable, when performed without faith and the knowledge of God.—The law has a sacrifice of many kinds of irrational beasts, all of which are combined in one sacrifice, in order that we ourselves may become reasonable men.
Starke: Nothing so urges us to what is good as the sense of God’s sweet grace and mercy.—The death of the old man is the life of the new man; where Adam’s wrath ceases, Christ’s meekness begins; and where Adam’s pride goes down, Christ’s humility rises.—Cramer: The Christians of the New Testament are spiritual priests, and bound to sacrifices, but they should sacrifice themselves: laying their obedience (1Sa_15:22), their lips (Hos_14:3), faith (Php_2:17), alms (Php_4:18), mercy (Hos_6:6), and all such things, on Jesus Christ, the golden altar, God will accept them.
Spener: It is not enough to do good and leave evil undone, but the Christian must present himself a complete sacrifice to God.—If, in short, we would know at what we should aim in Christianity, it is the Divine will, and therefore the Divine word. Whatever this forbids must be evil, though even the whole world should permit and praise it; and whatever it enjoins is good, though it should be displeasing to every one.—Bengel: They very improperly shirk from this perfect will who are always in search of what they, as they think, are at liberty to do without sin. But their course is just like that of a voyager, who, having lost his reckoning, is constantly in search of the most distant shore (Rom_12:2).
Roos: God wills every thing that is good, every thing that is well-pleasing to Him, and every thing that is perfect. That is good which harmonizes with God’s commandments; and it is good (
êáëüí
) in so far as it is well-pleasing to Him; and it is perfect if presented to the extent of our capacity (Rom_12:2).
Gerlach: The Apostle compares the worship of Christians in spirit and in truth (Joh_4:24), which he accordingly calls reasonable (comp. 1Pe_2:2), with the typical and figurative sacrificial worship of the Old Testament (Rom_12:1-2).
Heubner: The love and mercy of God should be the incentive and source of the Christian sense. This constitutes the characteristic difference between Christian piety and every other kind: it flows from faith and the experience of Divine love in Christ.—The mutual devotedness of God and pious people.—The holiness of the first commandment.—Christian faith is the foundation of Christian piety (Rom_12:1).—Mastery over the fashion of the world: love for God, and the wish to have only His grace, conquers.—Proper and improper accommodation to circumstances.—Christian life must be something in motion, otherwise it will stink. Accipiunt vitium, ni moveantur, aquœ.
