John Calvin Commentary Habakkuk 2

We have seen in the first chapter, Habakkuk 1:2–3, that the Prophet spoke in the name of all the faithful. It was indeed a hard struggle when all things were in a perplexed state and no outlet appeared. The faithful might have thought that all things happened by chance, that there was no divine providence; and even the Prophet uttered complaints of this kind.

He now begins to recover himself from his perplexities, and he always speaks in the person of the godly, or of the whole Church. I do not approve of what is done by some interpreters who confine what is said to the prophetic office; and it may be easy to learn from the context that the Prophet does not speak according to his private feeling, but that he represents the feelings of all the godly.

So then, we ought to connect this verse with the complaints which we have before noticed. For the Prophet, finding himself sinking and, as it were, overwhelmed in the deepest abyss, raises himself up above the judgment and reason of men and comes nearer to God, so that he might see from on high the things which take place on earth, and not judge according to the understanding of his own flesh, but by the light of the Holy Spirit. For the tower of which he speaks is patience arising from hope. If indeed we would struggle perseveringly to the last and at length obtain the victory over all trials and conflicts, we must rise above the world.

Some understand by tower and citadel the Word of God. This may be allowed in some measure, though it is not in every respect suitable. If we more fully weigh the reason for the metaphor, we shall have no difficulty knowing that the tower is the recess of the mind, where we withdraw ourselves from the world; for we find how inclined we all are to entertain distrust.

When, therefore, we follow our own inclination, various temptations immediately take hold of us; nor can we even for a moment exercise hope in God. Many things are also suggested to us which take away and deprive us of all confidence. We also become involved in a variety of thoughts, for when Satan finds people wandering in their imaginations and blending many things together, he so entangles them that they cannot by any means come near to God.

If then we would cherish faith in our hearts, we must rise above all these difficulties and hindrances. And the Prophet by "tower" means this: that he extricated himself from the thoughts of the flesh. For there would have been no end nor termination to his doubts had he tried to form a judgment according to his own understanding. I will stand, he says, on my tower, and I will set myself on the citadel. In short, the sentence carries this meaning: that the Prophet renounced the judgment of men and broke through all those snares by which Satan entangles us and prevents us from rising above the earth.

He then adds, I will watch to see what he may say to me; that is, I will be vigilant there. For by watching he means vigilance and waiting, as if he had said, “Though no hope should soon appear, I will not despond; nor will I forsake my station; but I will remain constantly in that tower, to which I wish now to ascend: I will watch then to see what he may say to me.” The reference is evidently to God, for the opinion of those who apply this “saying” to the ministers of Satan is not probable.

For the Prophet says first, I will see what he may say to me, and then he adds, and what I shall answer. Those who explain the words what he may say as referring to the wicked who might oppose him for the purpose of shaking his faith overlook the words of the Prophet, for he speaks here in the singular number; and as there is no name expressed, the Prophet no doubt meant God.

But even if the words were capable of admitting this explanation, yet the very drift of the argument shows that the passage has the meaning which I have attached to it. For how could the faithful answer the calumnies by which their faith was assailed, when the profane reproachfully mocked and derided them—how could they satisfactorily disprove such blasphemies, if they did not first attend to what God might say to them? For we cannot confute the devil and his ministers unless we are instructed by the word of God.

Thus, we see that the Prophet observes the best order in what he states, when he says in the first place, I will see what God may say to me; and in the second place, I shall then be taught to answer to my chiding. That is, “If the wicked deride my faith, I will be able boldly to confute them; for the Lord will suggest to me such things as may enable me to give a full answer.” We now perceive the simple and real meaning of this verse. It remains for us to apply the doctrine to our own use.

It must be first observed that there is no remedy when such trials as those mentioned by the Prophet in the first chapter, Habakkuk 1:4–17, meet us, unless we learn to lift our minds above the world. For if we contend with Satan according to our own perspective, he will overwhelm us a hundred times, and we can never be able to resist him.

Let us therefore know that the right way of fighting with him is shown to us here: when our minds are agitated with unbelief, when doubts respecting God’s providence creep in, when things are so confused in this world as to involve us in darkness, so that no light appears, we must set aside our own reason. For all our thoughts are worthless when we seek, according to our own reason, to form a judgment.

Until the faithful ascend to their tower and stand in their citadel, of which the Prophet here speaks, their temptations will drive them here and there and sink them, as if in a bottomless gulf. But so that we may more fully understand the meaning, we must know that there is here an implied contrast between the tower and the citadel, which the Prophet mentions, and a station on earth.

As long as we judge according to our own perceptions, we walk on the earth. While we do so, many clouds arise, and Satan scatters ashes in our eyes and completely darkens our judgment; thus it happens that we lie down completely confounded. It is therefore absolutely necessary, as we have before said, that we should tread our reason under foot and come near to God himself.

We have said that the tower is the recess of the mind; but how can we ascend to it? Even by following the word of the Lord. For we creep on the earth; indeed, we find that our flesh always draws us downward. Unless the truth from above becomes to us, as if, wings, or a ladder, or a vehicle, we cannot rise up one foot; but, on the contrary, we will seek refuges on the earth rather than ascend into heaven.

But let the word of God become our ladder, or our vehicle, or our wings; and, however difficult the ascent may be, we will still be able to fly upward, provided God’s word is allowed to have its own authority. Thus, we see how unsuitable is the view of those interpreters who think that the tower and the citadel are the word of God. For it is by God’s word, as I have already said, that we are raised up to this citadel, that is, to the safeguard of hope, where we may remain safe and secure while looking down from this eminence on those things which disturb us and darken all our senses as long as we lie on the earth. This is one thing.

Then the repetition is not without purpose, for the Prophet says, On my tower will I stand, on the citadel will I set myself. He does not repeat the same thing in other words because it is obscure, but in order to remind the faithful that, though they are inclined to sloth, they must yet strive to extricate themselves. And we soon find how slothful we become, unless each of us stirs himself up. For when any perplexity takes hold of our minds, we soon succumb to despair. This, then, is the reason why the Prophet, after having spoken of the tower, again mentions the citadel.

But when he says, I will watch to see, he refers to perseverance. For it is not enough to open our eyes once and by one look to observe what happens to us; it is necessary to continue our attention. This constant attention, then, is what the Prophet means by watching, for we are not so clear-sighted as to comprehend immediately what is useful to be known.

And then, though we may once see what is necessary, yet a new temptation can obliterate that view. It thus happens that all our observations become evanescent, unless we continue to watch—that is, unless we persevere in our attention, so that we may always return to God whenever the devil raises new storms and whenever he darkens the heavens with clouds to prevent us from seeing God.

Thus, we see how emphatic is what the Prophet says here, I will watch to see. The Prophet evidently compares the faithful to watchmen who, though they hear nothing, yet do not sleep; and if they hear any noise once or twice, they do not immediately sound an alarm, but wait and attend. As, then, those who keep watch ought to remain quiet, so that they may not disturb others and that they may duly perform their office, so it is fitting for the faithful to be also tranquil and quiet, and wait patiently for God during times of perplexity and confusion.

Let us now inquire what is the purpose of this watching: I will watch to see, he says, what he may say to me. There seems to be an impropriety in the expression, for we do not properly see what is said. But the Prophet connects together here two metaphors. Strictly speaking, he ought to have said, “I will continue attentive to hear what he may say;” but he says, I will watch to see what he may say. The metaphor is found correctly used in Psalm 85:8,

I will hear what God may say; for he will speak peace to his people.

There also it is a metaphor, for the Prophet does not speak of natural hearing: I will hear what God may speak. What does that hearing mean? It means this: I will quietly wait until God shows his favor, which is now hidden; for he will speak peace to his people; that is, the Lord will never forget his own Church.

But the Prophet, as I have said, joins together here two metaphors. For to speak, or to say, means nothing other than that God testifies to our hearts that, though the reason for his purpose does not immediately appear to us, yet all things are wisely ruled, and that nothing is better than to submit to his will.

But when he says, I will see, and I will watch what he may say, the metaphor seems incongruous, and yet there appears a reason for it; for the Prophet intended to remind us that we should employ all our senses for this end—to be completely attentive to God’s word.

For though one may be resolved to hear God, we yet find that many temptations immediately distract us. It is not then enough to become teachable and to apply our ears to hear his voice, unless our eyes are also connected with them, so that we may be completely attentive.

Thus, we see the object of the Prophet; for he meant to express the greatest attention, as if he had said that the faithful would always wander in their thoughts unless they carefully concentrated both their eyes and their ears, and all their senses, on God, and continually restrained themselves, so that stray speculations or imaginations should not lead them astray.

And further, the Prophet teaches us that we should have such reverence for God’s word as to consider it sufficient for us to hear his voice. Let this, then, be our understanding: to obey God speaking to us and reverently to embrace his word, so that he may deliver us from all troubles and also keep our minds in peace and tranquillity.

God’s speaking, then, is opposed to all the obstreperous clamors of Satan, which he never ceases to sound in our ears. For as soon as any temptation takes place, Satan suggests many things to us, and those of various kinds: What will you do? What advice will you take? See whether God is propitious to you from whom you expect help. How can you dare to trust that God will assist you? How can he extricate you? What will be the issue?

As Satan then disturbs us in various ways, the Prophet shows that the word of God alone is sufficient for us. All, then, who indulge themselves in their own counsel deserve to be forsaken by God and left by him to be driven up and down, and here and there, by Satan; for the only unfailing security for the faithful is to acquiesce in God’s word.

But this appears still more clear from what is expressed at the close of the verse, when the Prophet adds, and what I may answer to the reproof given me. For he shows that he would be equipped with the best weapons to sustain and repel all assaults, provided he patiently attended to God speaking to him and fully embraced his word. “Then,” he says, “I shall have what I may answer to all reproofs, when the Lord shall speak to me.”

By “reproofs,” he means not only the blasphemies by which the wicked shake his faith, but also all those turbulent feelings by which Satan secretly labors to subvert his faith. For not only do the ungodly deride us and mock at our simplicity, as if we presumptuously and foolishly trusted in God and were thus over-credulous; but we also reprove ourselves inwardly and disturb ourselves by various internal contentions. For whatever comes to our mind that is in opposition to God’s word is properly a chiding or a reproof, as it is the same thing as if one accused himself, as if he had not found God to be faithful.

We now, then, see that the word “reproof” extends farther than to those outward blasphemies by which the unbelieving usually assail the children of God. For, as we have already said, though no one attempted to try our faith, yet every one is a tempter to himself, for the devil never ceases to agitate our minds. When, therefore, the Prophet says, what I may answer to reproof, he means that he would be sufficiently fortified against all the assaults of Satan, both secret and external, when he heard what God might say to him.

We may also gather from the whole verse that we can form no judgment of God’s providence unless by the light of celestial truth. It is therefore no wonder that many fall away under trials, indeed, almost the whole world; for there are few who ascend into the citadel of which the Prophet speaks and who are willing to hear God speaking to them. Hence, presumption and arrogance blind the minds of men, so that they either speak evil of God who addresses them, or accuse fortune, or maintain that there is nothing certain. Thus they murmur within themselves, and claim more for themselves than they should, and never submit to God’s word. Let us proceed.

This verse is connected with the last, for the Prophet means to show that nothing is better than to rely on God’s word, however much various temptations may assault our souls. We therefore see that nothing new is said here, but that the former doctrine is confirmed—that our salvation is made safe and certain through God’s promise alone, and that therefore we should not seek any other haven where we might securely withstand all the attacks of Satan and of the world. But he sets the two clauses in opposition to each other: every man who would fortify himself would always be subject to various changes and never achieve a peaceful mind; then comes the other clause—that man cannot obtain rest in any other way than by faith.

But the former part is explained in various ways. Some interpreters think the word עפלה, ophle, to be a noun, and translate it as elevation, which is not unsuitable; and indeed I do not hesitate to regard this as its real meaning, for the Hebrews call a citadel עופל, ouphel, rightly deriving it from עפל, ophle, to ascend.

The claim by some others that it signifies "to strengthen" is not well founded. Others again give this explanation—that the unbelieving seek a stronghold for themselves, so that they may fortify themselves; and this makes little difference to the matter itself. But interpreters vary and differ as to the meaning of the sentence. Some substitute the predicate for the subject, and the subject for the predicate, and derive this meaning from the Prophet’s words: "Everyone whose mind is not at ease seeks a fortress, where he may safely rest and strengthen himself.” Others give this view: “He who is proud, or who thinks himself well fortified, shall always have an unquiet mind.” This latter meaning is what I approve, only I retain the import of the word עפלה, ophle, as if it were said: “where there is an elation of mind, there is no tranquility.”

Let us first see what their view is who give the other explanation. They say that the unbelieving, being obstinate and perverted in their minds, always seek a place where they may be safe, for they are full of suspicions, and disregarding God, they resort to the world for those remedies by which they may escape evils and dangers.

This is their view. But the Prophet, as I have already said, on the contrary, denounces punishment on the unbelieving here, as if he had said: “This reward, which they have deserved, will be repaid to them—that they shall always torment themselves.” The contrast will thus be more obvious. When we say that God punishes the unbelieving by allowing them to be driven here and there, and also harasses their minds with various tormenting thoughts, a more fruitful doctrine is derived.

Therefore, when the Prophet says that those who consider themselves well fortified possess no calmness of mind, he intimates that they are their own executioners. They seek for themselves many troubles, many sorrows, many anxieties, and contrive and combine many designs and purposes; they think of one thing, then turn to another. For the Hebrews say that the soul is made right when we accept something and remain in a tranquil state of mind; but when confused thoughts distract us, then they say that our soul is not right in us. Now we perceive the real meaning of the Prophet.

Behold, he says: by this demonstrative particle he intimates that what he teaches us may be clearly seen if we pay attention to daily events. The meaning then is, that a proof of this fact is evident in the common life of men—that he who fortifies himself, and is also elated with self-confidence, never finds a tranquil haven, for some new suspicion or fear always disturbs his mind.

Thus it happens that the soul entangles itself in various cares and anxieties. This is the reward, as I have said, which is allotted by God’s just judgment to the unbelieving. For God, as He testifies by Isaiah, offers us rest; and those who reject this invaluable benefit, freely offered to them by God, deserve not only to be tormented in one way, but also to be harassed by endless agitations, and also to vex and torment themselves.

It is indeed true that he who is fortified may also rest in God’s word; but the word עפלה, ophle, refers to the state of the mind. Whoever, then, swells with vain confidence, when he finds that he has many human aids, shall always be agitated, and will at length find that there is rest nowhere, except when the mind rests on God’s grace alone. Now we understand the meaning of this clause.

It follows, but the just shall live by his faith. The Prophet, I have no doubt, here places faith in opposition to all those defenses by which men so blind themselves as to neglect God and to seek no aid from Him. As men therefore rely on what the earth affords, depending on their fallacious supports, the Prophet here ascribes life to faith. But faith, as is well known, and as we shall presently show in more detail, depends on God alone. That we may then live by faith, the Prophet intimates that we must willingly give up all those defenses which tend to disappoint us. He, then, who finds that he is deprived of all protections, will live by his faith, provided he seeks in God alone what he wants, and leaving the world, fixes his mind on heaven.

As אמוגת, amunat, is "truth" in Hebrew, some regard it as meaning integrity; as if the Prophet had said that the just man has more safety in his faithfulness and pure conscience than the children of this world have in all those fortifications in which they glory. But in this case, they coldly diminish the Prophet’s declaration, for they do not understand what that righteousness of faith is from which our salvation proceeds. It is indeed certain that the Prophet understands by the word אמוגת, amunat, that faith which strips us of all arrogance and leads us naked and needy to God, so that we may seek salvation from Him alone, which would otherwise be far removed from us.

Now many limit the first part to Nebuchadnezzar, but this is not suitable. The Prophet indeed speaks to the end of the chapter about Babylon and its ruin; but here he makes a distinction between the children of God, who cast all their cares on Him, and the unbelieving, who cannot go beyond the world, where they seek to be made secure, and gather their defenses from there in which they trust.

And this is especially worth observing, for it greatly helps us to understand the meaning of the Prophet. If this part—Behold the proud, his soul is not right in him—is applied to Nebuchadnezzar, the other part will lose much of its significance. But if we consider that the Prophet, as it were, in these two tablets, shows what it is to glory in our own powers or in earthly aids, then what it is to rest on God alone will appear much clearer, and this truth will penetrate our minds with more force; for we know how much such comparisons illustrate a subject that would otherwise be obscure or less evident.

For if the Prophet had only declared that our faith is the cause of life and salvation, it might indeed be understood; but as we are inclined to entertain worldly hopes, the former truth would not have been sufficient to correct this evil and to free our minds from all empty confidence.

But when he affirms that all the unbelieving are deceived while they fortify or exalt themselves, because God will always confound them, and that though no one disturbs them outwardly, they will yet be their own tormentors, as they have nothing that is right, nothing that is certain—when therefore all this is said to us, it is as if God drew us forcibly to Himself, seeing us deluded by the allurements of Satan, and seeing us too inclined to be ensnared by deceptions, which would at length lead us to destruction.

Now, then, we perceive why Habakkuk has put these two things in opposition to each other—that the defenses of this world are not only fleeting, but also always bring with them many tormenting fears—and then, that the just lives by his faith. And from this also comes a confirmation of what I have already mentioned: that faith is not to be taken here for man’s integrity, but for that faith which sets man before God emptied of all good things, so that he seeks what he needs from His free goodness. For all the unbelieving try to fortify themselves; and thus they strengthen themselves, thinking that anything in which they trust is sufficient for them.

But what does the just do? He brings nothing before God except faith: then he brings nothing of his own, because faith borrows, as it were, through favor, what is not in man’s possession. He, then, who lives by faith, has no life in himself; but because he lacks it, he flees for it to God alone.

The Prophet also puts the verb in the future tense in order to show the perpetual nature of this life. For the unbelieving glory in a fleeting life; but the Lord will at last reveal their folly, and they themselves will truly know that they have been deceived. But as God never disappoints the hope of His people, the Prophet here promises a perpetual life to the faithful.

Let us now come to Paul, who has applied the Prophet’s testimony for the purpose of teaching us that salvation is not by works, but by the mercy of God alone, and therefore by faith. Paul seems to have misapplied the Prophet’s words and to have used them beyond what they mean; for the Prophet speaks here of the state of the present life, and he has not previously spoken of the heavenly life, but exhorted, as we have seen, the faithful to patience, and at the same time testified that God would be their deliverer. And now he adds, the just shall live by faith, though he may be lacking all help, and though he may be exposed to all the attacks of fortune, and of the wicked, and of the devil.

What has this to do, someone may say, with the eternal salvation of the soul? It seems, then, that Paul has with too much refinement introduced this testimony into his discussion respecting free justification by faith. But this principle should always be remembered—that whatever benefits the Lord bestows on the faithful in this life are intended to confirm them in the hope of the eternal inheritance; for however generously God may deal with us, our condition would yet be indeed miserable if our hope were confined to this earthly life.

Since God then intends to raise up our minds to the hopes of eternal salvation whenever He aids us in this world and declares Himself to be our Father, therefore, when the Prophet says that the faithful shall live, he certainly does not confine this life to such narrow limits that God will only defend us for a day or two, or for a few years. Instead, he goes much further and says that we will be made truly and genuinely happy; for though this whole world may perish or be exposed to various changes, yet the faithful will continue in permanent and real safety.

Hence, when Habakkuk promises future life to the faithful, he no doubt transcends the boundaries of this world and sets before the faithful a better life than that which they have here, which is accompanied with many sorrows and proves by its shortness to be unworthy of being greatly desired.

Now we perceive that Paul wisely and suitably applies the Prophet’s words to his subject—that the just lives by faith; for there is no salvation for the soul except through God’s mercy.

Quoting this passage in Romans 1:17, he says that the righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel from faith to faith, and then adds:

“As it is written, The just shall live by faith.”

Paul very rightly connects these things together: that righteousness is revealed in the Gospel, and that it comes to us by faith only. For he argues there that men cannot obtain righteousness by the law, or by the works of the law; it follows that it is revealed in the Gospel alone. How does he prove this? By the testimony of the Prophet Habakkuk—

“If by faith the just lives, then he is just by faith; if he is just by faith, then he is not so by the works of the law.”

And Paul assumes this principle, to which I have previously referred—that men are emptied of all works when they present their faith before God. For as long as man possesses anything of his own, he does not please God by faith alone, but also by his own worthiness.

If then faith alone obtains grace, the law must necessarily be set aside, as the apostle also explains more clearly in Galatians 3:11:

‘That righteousness,’ he says, ‘is not by the works of the law, is evident; for it is written, The just shall live by faith, and the law is not of faith.’

Paul assumes that these, even faith and law, are contrary to each other—contrary as to the work of justifying. The law indeed agrees with the gospel; indeed, it contains the gospel in itself. And Paul has solved this question in Romans 1:1-32 by saying that the law cannot assist us to attain righteousness, but that it is offered to us in the gospel, and that it receives a testimony from the Law and the Prophets.

Though then there is a complete concord between the law and the gospel, as God, who is not inconsistent with Himself, is the author of both, yet as to justification, the law does not accord with the gospel any more than light with darkness. For the law promises life to those who serve God, and the promise is conditional, dependent on the merits of works. The gospel also does indeed promise righteousness under condition, but it has no respect to the merits of works. What then? It is only this: that those who are condemned and lost should embrace the favor offered to them in Christ.

Now then we see how, by the testimony of our Prophet, Paul rightly confirms his own doctrine that eternal salvation is to be attained by faith only. For we are lacking all merits by works and are compelled to stand naked and needy before God; and then the Lord justifies us freely.

But that this may be more evident, let us first consider why men must come completely naked before God; for if there were any worthiness in them, the Lord would in no way deprive them of such an honor. Why then does the Lord justify us freely, except so that He may thereby appear just?

He has indeed no need of this glory, as if He could not Himself be glorified except by doing wrong to men. But we obtain righteousness by faith alone for this reason: because God finds nothing in us which He can approve, or which may be sufficient to obtain righteousness. Since this is so, we then see that to be true which the Holy Spirit everywhere declares respecting the character of men.

Men indeed glory in a foolish conceit as to their own righteousness. But all philosophic virtues, as they call them, which men think they possess through free will, are mere illusions; indeed, they are the delusions of the devil, by which he bewitches the minds of men, so that they do not come to God, but, on the contrary, hurl themselves into the lowest depths, where they seek to exalt themselves beyond measure.

Be that as it may, let us be fully convinced that in man there is not even a particle of either rectitude or righteousness, and that whatever men may try to do of themselves is an abomination before God. This is one thing.

Now after God has extended His hand to His elect, it is still necessary that they should confess their own need and nakedness, as to justification. For though they have been regenerated by the Spirit of God, yet in many things they are lacking, and thus in innumerable ways they become exposed to eternal death in the sight of God, so that they have in themselves no righteousness.

The Papists differ from us in the first place, imagining that there are certain necessary preparations; for that false notion about free will cannot be eradicated from their hearts. Since then they will have man to be endowed with free will, they always connect some power with it, as if they could obtain grace by their own doings.

They indeed confess that man by himself can do nothing, except by the helping grace of God; but in the meantime they blend, as I have said, their own invented preparations. Others confess that until God precedes us with His grace, there is no power whatever in free will; but afterwards they suppose that free will concurs with God’s grace, as it would be by itself ineffective unless received by our consent.

Thus they always reserve some worthiness for men; but a greater difference exists as to the second subject. For after we have been regenerated through God’s grace, the Papists imagine that we are justified by the merits of works. They confess that until God precedes us with His grace, we are condemned and cannot attain salvation except through the assisting grace of God; but as soon as God works in us, we are then, they say, able to attain righteousness by our own works.

But we object and say that the faithful, after having been regenerated by the Spirit of God, do not fulfill the law. They allow this to be true, but say that they could if they wished, for God has commanded nothing which is beyond what men are capable of doing.

And this also is a most pernicious error. They are at the same time forced to confess that experience itself teaches us that no man is entirely free from sin; then some guilt always remains. But they say that if we kept half the law, we could obtain righteousness by that half.

Hence, if one by adultery offended God and thus becomes exposed to eternal death, and yet abstains from theft, he is just, they say, because he is no thief. He is an adulterer, it is true; but he is yet just in part, because he keeps a part of the law; and they call this partial righteousness.

But God has not promised salvation to men unless they fully and truly fulfill whatever He has commanded in His law. For it is not said, “He that fulfills a part of the law shall live”; but he who shall do these things shall live in them. Moses does not point out two or three commandments but includes the whole law (Leviticus 18:5). There is also a declaration made by James:

‘He who has forbidden to commit adultery, has also forbidden to steal: whosoever then transgresses the law in one particular, is a transgressor of the whole law’ (James 2:8, 11).

He is then excluded from any hope of righteousness. We therefore see that the Papists are most grossly mistaken, who imagine that men, when they keep the law only in part, are just.

If indeed anyone were found who strictly kept God’s law, he could not be counted just, except by virtue of a promise. And here also the Papists stumble and are at the same time inconsistent with themselves, for they confess that merits do not obtain righteousness for men by their own intrinsic worth, but only by the covenant of the law.

But as soon as they have said this, they immediately forget themselves and say the contrary, like men carried away by passion. If then the Papists were to join together these two things—that there is no righteousness except by covenant, and that there is a partial righteousness—they would see that they are inconsistent. For where is this partial righteousness? If we are not righteous except according to the covenant of the law, then we are not righteous except through a full and perfect observance of the law. This is certain.

They err still more grievously as to the remission of sins; for as is well known, they obtrude their own satisfactions, and thus seek to expiate the sins of men by their own merits, as if the sacrifice of Christ were not sufficient for that purpose. This is why they will not allow that we are freely justified by faith; for they cannot be brought to acknowledge a free remission of sins. And unless the remission of sins is free, we must confess that righteousness is not by faith alone, but also by merits.

But the whole Scripture proves that expiation is to be sought nowhere else than through the sacrifice of Christ alone. This error, then, of the Papists is extremely gross and false. They further err in pleading for the merits of works, for they boast of their own inventions, the works of supererogation, or as they call them, satisfactions.

And these meritorious works, under the Papacy, are gross errors and worthless superstitions, and yet they toil in them and lacerate themselves; indeed, they almost wear themselves out. If they mutter many short prayers, if they run to altars and to various churches, if they buy masses—in a word, if they accumulate all these invented acts of worship—they think that they merit righteousness before God.

Thus they forget their own saying that righteousness is by covenant; for if it is by covenant, it is certain that God does not promise it to invented works, which men of themselves invent and contrive. It then follows that what men bring to God, devised by themselves, can do nothing towards the attainment of righteousness.

There is also another error which must be noticed, for in good works they do not perceive those blemishes which justly displease God, so that our works could be deservedly condemned if they were strictly examined and tried. The Papists rightly say that we are not justified by the intrinsic worthiness of works, but afterwards they do not consider how imperfect our works are, for no work proceeds from mortal man which can fully answer to what God’s covenant requires.

How so? For no work proceeds from the perfect love of God, and where the perfect love of God does not exist, corruption is there. It therefore follows that all our works are polluted before God, for they flow only from the impure fountain of the heart. If anyone were to object and say that the hearts of men are cleansed by the regeneration of the Spirit, we allow this; but at the same time, much filth always remains in our hearts, and it should be sufficient for us to know that nothing is pure and genuine before God except where the perfect love of Him exists.

Since, then, the Papists are blind to all these things, it is no wonder that they contend with us with so much hostility about righteousness and can in no way allow that the righteousness of faith is free. For from the beginning, this invention about free will has been used—“if men of themselves come to God, then they are not freely justified.” They, then, as I have said, imagine a partial righteousness; they suppose the deficiency to be made up by satisfactions; they also have, as they say, their devotions, that is, their own invented modes of worship.

Thus it happens that they always persuade themselves that the righteousness of man, at least in part, is made up by himself or by works. They indeed allow that we are justified by faith, but when it is added, "by faith alone," then they begin to be furious. But they do not consider that righteousness, if obtained by faith, cannot be by works, for Paul, as I have shown above, reasons from the contrary when he says that righteousness, if it is by the works of the law, is not by faith. For faith, as has been said, strips man of everything, so that he may seek from God what he needs.

But the Papists, though they think that man does not have enough for himself, do not yet acknowledge that he is so needy and miserable that righteousness must be sought in God alone. Yet the doctrine of Paul is sufficiently clear, and if Paul had never spoken, reason itself is sufficient to convince us that men cannot be justified by faith until they cast away every confidence in their own works. For if righteousness is of faith, then it is of grace alone, and if by grace alone, then it cannot be by works.

It is entirely childish for the Papists to think that it is partly by grace and partly by the merits of works. For as salvation cannot be divided, so righteousness, by which we attain salvation itself, cannot be divided. Since, then, faith acquires favor for us before God, and by this favor we are counted just, so all works must necessarily fall to the ground when righteousness is ascribed to faith.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that as the corruption of our flesh always leads us to pride and empty confidence, we may be illuminated by Your word, so as to understand how great and how grievous our poverty is, and thus be taught completely to deny ourselves, and so to present ourselves naked before You, that we may not hope for righteousness or for salvation from any other source than from Your mercy alone, nor seek any rest but only in Christ. And may we cling to You by the sacred and inviolable bond of faith, that we may boldly despise all those empty boastings by which the ungodly exult over us, and that we may also so cast ourselves down in true humility, that thereby we may be carried upward above all heavens and become partakers of that eternal life which Your only begotten Son has purchased for us by His own blood. Amen.

[Exposition continues from previous day's lecture]

We yesterday compared this passage of Habakkuk with the interpretation of Paul, who draws this inference: that we are justified by faith without the works of the law, because the Prophet teaches us that we are to live by faith. For the way of life and of righteousness is the same, since life is not to be sought by us in any other way than through the paternal favor of God.

This then is our life—to be united to God. But this union with God cannot be hoped for by us while He imputes sins to us; for as He is just and cannot deny Himself, iniquity must always be hated by Him. As long as He regards us as sinners, He must necessarily hold us as hateful to Him. Where the hatred of God is, there is death and ruin.

It then follows that we can have no hope of life until we are reconciled to God, and there is no other way by which God can restore us to favor but by regarding and counting us as just. It therefore follows that Paul reasons correctly when he leads us from life to righteousness, for they are two things which are connected and inseparable.

Hence the error of the Papists comes to light, who think that to be justified is nothing other than to be renewed in righteousness, so that we may lead a pious and a holy life. Hence their righteousness is a quality. But Paul’s view is very different, for he connects our justification and salvation together, since God cannot be favorable to us without being reconciled to us.

And how is this done? Even by not imputing our sins to us. Hence they speak correctly and truly express what the Holy Spirit everywhere teaches us, who call it imputative righteousness; for they thus show that it is not a quality but, on the contrary, a relative righteousness. Therefore, we said yesterday that he who lives by faith derives life from another, and that everyone who is just by faith is just through what is not in himself—even through the free mercy of God.

Now then we see how suitably Paul joins righteousness with life and cites the Prophet’s testimony to prove free justification, who affirms that we are to live by faith. But it is no wonder that the Papists go astray in so many ways in this instance, for they even differ with us in the meaning of the word faith.

This is why they so obstinately deny that we are justified by faith alone. They are forced, as we said yesterday, to admit the righteousness of faith; but the exclusive particle they cannot endure, for they imagine that it is a "moulded faith" that justifies, and this moulded or formed faith is piety, or the fear of God.

And by calling faith "unformed," they seem to think that we can embrace the promises of God without the fruit of regeneration, which is very absurd, as if faith were not the special gift of the Spirit and a pledge of our adoption. But these are principles of which the Papists are entirely ignorant, for they are given up to a reprobate mind, so that they stumble at the very first elements of religion.

But it is sufficient for us, in order to understand this passage, to know that we live by faith. For our life is a shadow or a passing cloud, and hence our only remedy is to seek life from God alone. And how does God communicate this life to us? Even by free promises which we embrace by faith; hence salvation is by faith.

Now, salvation cannot be ascribed to faith and to works also; for faith refers the praise for life and salvation to God alone, and works show that something is due to man. Faith, then, as to justification, entirely excludes all works, so that they are of no account before God. And hence I have said that salvation is by faith, for we are accepted by God through the free remission of sins.

The union of God with us is true and real salvation. But no one can be united to God without righteousness, and no righteousness is found in us; hence God Himself freely imputes it to us. And as we are justified freely, so our salvation is said to be free.

I will not now repeat what may be said of justification by faith, for it is better to proceed with the Prophet’s subject; only it may be necessary to add two things to what has been said. The Prophet testified to the men of his age that salvation is by faith; it then follows that they looked to Christ, for without relying on a mediator they could not have trusted in God.

For as our righteousness is said to be the remission of sins, so a sacrifice must necessarily intervene, by which God is pacified, so as not to impute our sins. They had indeed their sacrifices according to the law, but these were to direct their minds to Christ; for they were in no way acceptable to God, except through that Mediator on whom our faith at this day is founded.

There is also another thing: the Prophet, by distinctly expressing that the just live by faith, clearly shows that through the whole course of this life we cannot be deemed just in any other way than by a free imputation. He does not say that the children of Adam, born in a state exposed to eternal death, recover life by faith, but that the just, who are now endowed with the true fear of God, live by faith. And thus the romance about initial justification is refuted. Let us now then proceed.

The Prophet has taught us that a tranquil state of mind can only be had by relying on the grace of God alone; and that those who exalt themselves, fly in the air, and feed on the wind, bring upon themselves many sorrows and anxieties. But he now comes to the king of Babylon, and also to his kingdom; for in my judgment, he speaks not only of the king, but also includes that tyrannical empire with its people, representing them as a great company of robbers.

He then says, in short, that though the Babylonians, like drunken men, rushed here and there without any control, yet God’s vengeance, by which they were to be brought to nothing, was near at hand. Whatever, therefore, the Prophet adds to the end of the chapter tends to confirm his doctrine, which we have already explained—that the just shall live by faith.

Indeed, we cannot be fully convinced of this unless we firmly hold this principle: that God cares for us, and that the whole world is governed by His providence, so that it must be that He will eventually check the wicked, punish their sins, and deliver the innocent who call upon Him.

Unless this is our conviction, no benefit can be derived from our faith; indeed, we might be deceived a hundred times, for experience teaches us that the hopes of men, as long as they are fixed on the earth, are vain and delusive, as they are only mere imaginations.

For if God does not govern the world, there is no salvation for the faithful. In that case, God would delude them with vain promises, and they would flatter themselves with an empty prospect, or hope for that which is not. Hence, the Prophet shows how it is that the just shall live by faith: it is because the Lord will defend all who call upon Him. And since He is the just Judge of all the world, He will finally execute judgment on all the wicked, though for a time they act wantonly and think they will escape punishment because God does not execute immediate vengeance upon them. We now perceive the Prophet's design.

Regarding the words, these two particles, אף כי (aph ki), when joined together, amplify the meaning. Some render them as 'how much more'; others take them as a simple affirmative and render them as 'truly.' I approve of a middle course and render them as 'yea, truly' (Etiam certe). They are taken this way, I think, in Genesis 3:1, where Satan asked the woman, 'Yea, truly! Est-ce pour vrai?' For the question is that of one doubting, yet it refers to what is certain: 'How is it that God should forbid the eating of the fruit? Yea, is it so truly? Can it be so?'

So it is in this place, 'yea, truly,' says the Prophet. That it is an amplification can be gathered from the context. He had said before that those who exalt themselves, or consider themselves well fortified, are fearful in their minds and driven back and forth. He now advances another step: when men are carried along by unrestrained wantonness and promise themselves all things, as though there were no God, they surpass even the drunken, being hurried on by blind cupidity.

When, therefore, men thus abandon themselves, can they escape the judgment of God? Such madness is far less bearable than that simple arrogance of which he had spoken in the last verse. Thus, then, are the two verses connected: 'Yea, truly, he who in his pride is like a drunken man, and does not restrain himself, and who is even like wild beasts or the grave, devouring whatever meets them—he surely will not ultimately be endured by God.' Vengeance, then, is near to all the proud who are cruelly furious, passing all bounds and without any fear.

But interpreters differ as to the meaning of the words that follow. Some render בוגד (bugad) as 'to deceive,' and it means so in some places; they render the clause thus: 'Wine deceives a proud man, and he will not dwell.' This is indeed true, but the meaning is strained. I therefore prefer to follow the commonly received interpretation: that the proud man transgresses, as it were, through wine.

At the same time, I do not agree with others regarding the expression 'transgressing as through wine.' Some give this version: 'A man addicted to wine or to drunkenness transgresses'; and then they add, 'a proud man will not inhabit.' But they pervert the sentence and mangle the Prophet's words, for His words are, By wine transgressing the proud man. He does not say that a man addicted to wine transgresses; rather, he compares the proud to drunken men who, forgetting all reason and shame, abandon themselves to all that is disgraceful.

For drunken men distinguish nothing and become like brute animals, so that they shun nothing base and unbecoming. This is why the Prophet compares proud men to drunken men, who transgress through wine—that is, who observe no moderation but indulge themselves in excesses. We now, then, understand the real meaning of the Prophet, which many have not perceived.

As to the word inhabiting, I take it in a metaphorical sense, as signifying to rest or to continue in the same place. Drunken men are carried along by a certain excitement, so they do not restrain themselves, for they have no power over their feet or their hands. But as wine excites them, they ramble here and there like insane persons. Just as such an unruly temper lays hold of and bewilders drunken men, so the Prophet very aptly says that the proud man never rests.

And the reason follows (if this meaning is accepted): because he enlarges as the grave his soul, he is like to death. This, then, is the insatiableness he had mentioned—that the proud cannot be satisfied and therefore include heaven, earth, and sea within the compass of their desires. Since, then, they thus run here and there, it is no wonder that the Prophet says they do not rest.

He enlarges then as the grave his soul; and then he adds, he heaps together (or congregates, or collects) to himself all nations, and accumulates to himself all people. That is, the proud man keeps within no moderate limits. For though he were able to make one heap of all nations, he would still think that not enough, like Alexander, who wept because he had not yet enjoyed the empire of the whole world. And had he enjoyed it, his tears would not have been dried, for he had heard that, according to the opinion of Democritus, there were many worlds.

What did he mean? Even this: 'Were I to obtain the empire of the world, I should still be poor; for if there are more worlds, I should still wish to devour them all.' These proud men surpass every kind of drunkenness.

We now understand the meaning of the words. And though they contain a general truth, the Prophet no doubt applies them to the king of Babylon and to all the Chaldeans; for as has been said, he includes the whole nation. He shows here then, that the Chaldeans were much worse and less excusable than those who with great fierceness exalted themselves, for their rage carried them further, as they wished to swallow up the whole world.

But to express this more fully, he says that they were like drunken men. He no doubt indirectly derides here the counsels of princes, who think themselves very wise when they either by deceit oppress their neighbors, or by artful means seize the lands of others for themselves, or by some contrivance, or even by force of arms, take possession of them. As princes take wonderful delight in their iniquities, so the Prophet says that they are like drunken men who transgress by wine—that is, who are completely overcome by excessive drinking. At the same time, he shows the cause of this drunkenness by mentioning the words גבר יהיר, 'proud man.' As, then, they are proud, all their crafts are like the freaks of drunkenness—that is, furious, as when a man is deprived of reason by wine. Having thus spoken of the Babylonians, he immediately adds—

Finally, the Prophet denounces punishment on the Babylonian king and the Chaldeans, for the Lord would make them a laughingstock for all. Some think that a punishment is also expressed in the preceding verse, such as awaits violent robbers who devour the whole world. But I, on the contrary, think that the Prophet spoke previously of proud cruelty, and simply showed what a destructive evil it is, being an insatiable cupidity.

And now, as I have stated, he comes to its punishment. He says first that all the people who had been collected, as it were, into a heap, would take up a parable or a taunt to scoff at the king of Babylon. Therefore, when the Chaldeans would possess the empire of almost the whole world and subject all their neighboring nations to their power, all these would finally take up parables and taunts against them. And what would be said everywhere would be this: Woe to him who increases and enriches himself by things not his own! How long? That is, is this to be perpetual? All then who thus increase themselves heap on themselves thick clay, by which they will finally be overthrown.

With regard to the words, משל, meshil, is a short saying or a pithy sentence, worthy to be remembered, as we have noticed elsewhere. Some translate it as “parable.” As for the word מליצה, melitse, it probably signifies a scoff or a taunt by which anyone is reproved, for it comes from לוף, luts, which means to laugh at or deride someone.

It is indeed true that the Hebrews call a rhetorician or an interpreter מליף, melits; and hence some translate מליצה, melitse, as “interpretation.” But this is not suitable to this passage, for the Prophet speaks here of taunts that would be cast against the king of Babylon. For as he had, as with an open mouth, swallowed up all, so also all would eagerly prick him with their goads and disdainfully deride him.

The word he adds afterwards, חידות, chidut, is to be read, I have no doubt, in the genitive case. I therefore do not approve of adding a copulative, as many do, and reading thus: “a taunt and an enigma.” This word comes from the verb חוד, chud, which means to speak enigmatically; hence חידות, chidut, are enigmas, metaphors, or obscure sentences.

We know that when we wish to touch someone to the quick, there is more sharpness when we use an obscure word that contains a metaphor, ambiguity, or something of this kind. It is not, therefore, without reason that the Prophet calls taunts enigmas (חידות, chidut)—that is, obscure words, which bite or prick people sharply, as it were, with goads. Hence, in all scoffs, figurative language ought to be used. Unless the expression is ambiguous or alliterative, or, in short, contains such metaphors as it is not necessary to list here, there would be no beauty or aptness in it. Therefore, when people wish to form biting taunts, they obscure what might be plainly said by some indirect metaphor. This is the reason why the Prophet speaks here of an enigmatical taunt, for on that account it is more severe.

And he shall say. There is a change of number in this verb, but it does not obscure the sense. The particle הוי may be translated as “woe,” or it may be an exclamation, as when one is attracted by some particular sight, like caca or sus. It is often understood this way by the Hebrews, and the context seems to favor this meaning, for “woe” would be frigid. When the Prophets pronounce a curse on the wicked, it is undoubtedly a dreadful threat. But what is found here is a taunt, by which the whole world would deride those haughty tyrants who thought that they ought to have been worshipped as gods. “Ha!” they say, “where is he who multiplies himself by what belongs to another? And then, How long is this to be? Even such accumulate on themselves thick clay!” That is, they sink themselves in deep caverns and heap on themselves mountains, by which they become overwhelmed. We now understand the meaning of the Prophet’s words.

That this seems to be the singing of triumph before the victory is no cause for wonder. For our faith, as is well known, does not depend on the judgment of the flesh, nor does it regard what is openly evident. Instead, it is a vision of hidden things, as it is called in Hebrews 11:1, and the substance of things not seen.

Since, then, the firmness of faith is the same, though what it apprehends is remote, and since faith does not cease to see hidden things—for through the mirror of God’s word it ascends above heaven and earth and penetrates into the spiritual kingdom of God—since faith, then, possesses such a distant view, it is not surprising that the Prophet here boldly triumphs over the Babylonians. He now prescribes a derisive song for all nations, so that the proud, who had previously exalted themselves with such cruelty, might be scoffed at and derided.

But if anyone were to ask whether it is right to assail even the wicked with scoffs and raillery, the question is unsuitable here. For the Prophet does not refer here to what is lawful for the faithful to do, but speaks only of what is commonly done by people. And we know that it is almost natural to people that when those whom they had feared and dared not blame while they were in power are overthrown, they break forth against them not only with many complaints and accusations but also with wanton rudeness.

Since, then, it usually happens that all triumph over fallen tyrants, hurl their taunts, and all seek in this way to bite, the Prophet describes this regular course of things. However, it is not to be doubted that he composed this song according to the nature of the case when he says that they were people who multiplied their own possessions with what belonged to others—that is, that they gathered the wealth of others.

It is indeed true that many things are commonly spread abroad for which there is no reason or justice. But since some principles of equity and justice remain in human hearts, the consent of all nations is, as it were, the voice of nature, or the testimony of that equity which is engraved on human hearts and which they can never obliterate. Such is the reason for this saying.

For Habakkuk, by introducing the people as the speakers, propounded, as it were, the common law of nature, with which all agree. And that is: that whoever enriches himself with another’s wealth will eventually fall, and that when one accumulates great riches, these will become like a heap to cover and overwhelm him. And if any one of us consults his own mind, he will find that this is engraved on his very nature.

How, then, does it happen that many still labor to get for themselves the wealth of others, and strive for nothing else throughout their whole lives but to plunder others so that they may enrich themselves? It therefore appears that people’s minds are deprived of reason by sottishness whenever they thus addict themselves to unjust gain, or when they give themselves free rein to commit frauds, robberies, and plunders. And thus we perceive that the Prophet had not without reason represented all the proud and the cruel as drunken.

Then follow the words, עד-מתי, od-mati, How long? This also is the dictate of nature: that is, that there will sometime be an end to unjust plundering, though God may not immediately check plunderers and wicked people, who proceed and achieve their purposes by force and slaughter, frauds, and evil deeds.

In the meantime, the Prophet also intimates that tyrants and their cruelty cannot be endured without great weariness and sorrow. For indignation on account of evil deeds kindles within the hearts of all, so that they become weary when they see that wicked people are not soon restrained. Hence, almost the whole world cries out these words, “How long? How long?”

When anyone disturbs the whole world by his ambition and avarice, or everywhere commits plunder, or oppresses miserable nations—when he distresses the innocent—all cry out, “How long?” And this cry, proceeding as it does from the feeling of nature and the dictate of justice, is finally heard by the Lord.

For how does it happen that all, being touched with weariness, cry out, “How long?” except that they know that this confusion of order and justice is not to be endured? And this feeling, is it not implanted in us by the Lord? It is then the same as though God heard himself when he hears the cries and groanings of those who cannot bear injustice.

But let us, in the meantime, ensure that no one of us should have to say to himself the same thing that he brings forward against others. For when any avaricious person proceeds by right or wrong, as they say, when an ambitious person, by unfair means, advances himself, we instantly cry, “How long?” And when any tyrant violently oppresses helpless people, we always say, “How long?”

Though everyone says this about others, yet no one says it about himself. Let us therefore take care that, when we reprove injustice in others, we turn without delay to ourselves and be impartial judges. Self-love so blinds us that we seek to absolve ourselves from the same fault that we freely condemn in others.

In general things, people are always more correct in their judgment—that is, in matters in which they themselves are not concerned. But as soon as they consider themselves, they become blind, and all rectitude vanishes, and all judgment is gone.

Let us then know that this song is set forth here by the Prophet, drawn, as it were, from the common feeling of nature, so that every one of us may put a restraint on himself when he discharges the office of a judge in condemning others. And so that he may also condemn himself and restrain his desires when he finds them advancing beyond just bounds.

We must also observe what he adds: that the avaricious accumulate on themselves thick clay. This at first may appear incredible, but the subject itself plainly shows what the Prophet teaches here, provided our minds are not so blinded as not to see plain things. Indeed, hardly an avaricious person can be found who is not a burden to himself, and to whom his wealth is not a source of trouble.

Everyone who has accumulated much, when he comes to old age, is afraid to use what he has acquired, being ever solicitous lest he should lose anything. And then, as he thinks nothing is sufficient, the more he possesses, the more grasping he becomes. And “frugality” is the name given to that sordid and, so to speak, servile restraint within which the rich confine themselves.

In short, when anyone forms a judgment about all the avaricious people of this world, and is himself free from all avarice, having a free and unbiased mind, he will easily apprehend what the Prophet says here: that all the wealth of this world is nothing but a heap of clay, as when anyone willingly puts himself under a great heap that he had collected.

Some refer this to the walls of Babylon, which were built of baked bricks, as is well known; but this is too far-fetched. Others think that the Prophet speaks of the final end of us all, for those who possess the greatest riches, being finally thrown into the grave, are covered with earth. But this also is not suitable here.

Nor is it any more suitable when they apply it to Nebuchadnezzar—that is, to that sottishness by which he had intoxicated himself almost throughout his whole life—or when others apply it to Belshazzar, his grandson, because when he drank from the sacred vessels of the temple, he uttered slanders and blasphemies against God. These explanations are by no means suitable. For the Prophet does not speak here of the person of the king alone; but, as has been said, he, on the contrary, summons to judgment the whole nation, which had given itself up to plundering, frauds, and other evil deeds.

Then a general truth is to be drawn from this expression: that all the avaricious, the more they heap together, the more they lade themselves and, as it were, bury themselves under a great load. Why is this? Because riches, acquired by frauds and plundering, are nothing but a heavy and cumbersome lump of earth, for God returns on the heads of those who thus seek to enrich themselves whatever they have plundered from others.

Had they been contented with some moderate portion, they might have lived cheerfully and happily, as we see to be the case with all the godly. Though they possess but little, they are yet cheerful, for they live in hope, know that their supplies are in God’s hand, and expect everything from his blessing. Hence, then, their cheerfulness, because they have no anxious fears.

But those who intoxicate themselves with riches find that they carry a useless burden, under which they lie down, as it were, sunk and buried.

Prayer:

Grant, Almighty God, that as you deign so far to condescend as to sustain the care of this life, and to supply us with whatever is necessary for our pilgrimage—O grant that we may learn to rely on you, and so to trust in your blessing, as to abstain not only from all plunder and other evil deeds, but also from every unlawful coveting; and to continue in your fear, and so to learn also to bear our poverty on the earth, that being content with those spiritual riches which you offer to us in your gospel, and of which you now make us partakers, we may ever cheerfully aspire to that fullness of all blessings which we shall enjoy when we finally reach the celestial kingdom, and be perfectly united to you, through Christ our Lord. Amen.

The Prophet continues with the subject we have already begun to explain, for he introduces here the common taunts against the king of Babylon and the whole tyrannical empire, by which many nations had been cruelly oppressed. He therefore says that enemies, who would bite him, would suddenly and unexpectedly rise up. Some interpret this as referring to worms, but incorrectly: for God not only inflicted punishment on the king when he was dead, but he also intended for there to be on earth an evident and memorable proof of his vengeance on the Babylonians, by which it might be made known to all that their cruelty could not be allowed to go unpunished.

The words, Shall not they rise suddenly, are emphatic, both regarding the question and the word, פתע, peto, suddenly. Indeed, we know that interrogations are more common in Hebrew than in Greek and Latin, and that they are stronger and more forceful. Our Prophet then speaks of what was undeniable. He adds, suddenly; for the Babylonians, relying on their own power, did not think that any evil was near them; and if anyone dared to rise up against them, this uprising would not have been so sudden that they would have been unable to resist in time and drive far away every danger. They indeed ruled far and wide, and we know that the wicked often feel secure when they find themselves fortified on all sides. But the Prophet declares here that evil was near them, which would suddenly overwhelm them. It now follows—