John Calvin Commentary Romans 7

Although he had, in a brief manner, sufficiently explained the question concerning the abrogation of the law, yet because it was a difficult one and might have given rise to many other questions, he now explains in greater detail how the law, with regard to us, has become abrogated. He then presents what good is achieved for us through this: for while the law holds us separated from Christ and bound to itself, it can do nothing but condemn us.

And so that no one would blame the law itself on this account, he addresses and refutes the objections of the flesh and deals, in a striking manner, with the great question concerning the use of the law.

Do you not know, etc. Let the general proposition be that the law was given to people for no other purpose than to regulate the present life, and that it does not belong to those who are dead. To this he afterwards adds this truth—that we are dead to it through the body of Christ. Some understand that the dominion of the law continues to bind us as long as it remains in force.

But as this view is somewhat obscure and does not harmonize so well with the proposition that immediately follows, I prefer to follow those who regard what is said as referring to the life of man, and not to the law. The question indeed has a peculiar force, because it affirms the certainty of what is said; for it shows that it was not a thing new or unknown to any of them, but acknowledged equally by them all.

(For to those who know the law I speak.) This parenthesis is to be understood in the same sense as the question, as if he had said that he knew that they were not so unskilled in the law as to entertain any doubt on the subject. And although both sentences might be understood to refer to all laws, it is still better to take them as referring to the law of God, which is the subject being discussed.

Some think that he ascribes knowledge of the law to the Romans because the largest part of the world was under their power and government, but this is childish. For he addressed, in part, the Jews or other foreigners, and in part, common and obscure individuals.

Indeed, he mainly regarded the Jews, with whom his primary concern lay regarding the abrogation of the law. And so that they would not think he was trying to trap them with clever arguments, he declares that he employed a common principle, known to them all—one of which they could by no means be ignorant, having been brought up in the teaching of the law from their childhood.

For a woman subject to a man, etc. He presents an analogy by which he proves that we are so released from the law that it no longer, properly and by its own right, retains any authority over us. And although he could have proved this by other reasons, yet because the example of marriage was very suitable to illustrate the subject, he introduced this comparison instead of evidence to prove his point.

So that no one may be puzzled because the different parts of the comparison do not entirely correspond, we should be reminded that the Apostle intentionally, by a small change, sought to avoid the offensiveness of a stronger expression. He might have said, to make the comparison complete, “A woman after the death of her husband is released from the bond of marriage; the law, which is like a husband to us, is dead to us; then we are freed from its power.” But so that he might not offend the Jews by the harshness of his expressions, if he had said that the law was dead, he shifted his phrasing and said that we are dead to the law. Indeed, to some he appears to reason from the lesser to the greater argument; however, because I fear that this interpretation is too forced, I prefer the first meaning, which is simpler.

The whole argument, then, is formed in this way: “The woman is bound to her living husband by the law, so that she cannot be the wife of another; but after the death of her husband she is released from the bond of his law, so that she is free to marry whom she pleases.”

Then follows the application, —
The law was, as it were, our husband,
under whose yoke we were kept until it became dead to us;
After the death of the law Christ received us, that is, he joined us,
when released from the law, to himself;
Then, being united to Christ risen from the dead,
we ought to cling to him alone;
And as the life of Christ after the resurrection is eternal,
so hereafter there shall be no divorce.

Furthermore, the word "law" is not used here in every instance in the same sense. In one place it means the bond of marriage; in another, the authority of a husband over his wife; and in another, the Law of Moses.

However, we must remember that Paul refers here only to that function of the law specific to the dispensation of Moses. For inasmuch as God has taught in the Ten Commandments what is just and right, and given directions for guiding our life, no abrogation of the law is to be contemplated, because the will of God must remain the same forever. We should carefully remember that this is not a release from the righteousness taught in the law, but from its rigid requirements and from the curse that consequently follows. The law, then, as a rule of life, is not abrogated; rather, what is abrogated is that aspect of it which is opposed to the liberty obtained through Christ—namely, its requirement of absolute perfection. For since we do not achieve this perfection, it holds us under the sentence of eternal death.

However, since it was not his purpose here to define the nature of the marriage bond, he was not concerned with mentioning the causes that release a woman from her husband. Therefore, it is unreasonable to seek anything decisive on this point here.

Through the body of Christ. Christ, by the glorious victory of the cross, first triumphed over sin; and that he might do this, it was necessary that the handwriting by which we were held bound should be cancelled. This handwriting was the law, which, while it continued in force, rendered us bound to serve sin; and hence it is called the power of sin.

It was then by cancelling this handwriting that we were delivered through the body of Christ—through his body as fixed to the cross. But the Apostle goes further and says that the bond of the law was destroyed; not that we may live according to our own will, like a widow who lives as she pleases while single, but that we may now be bound to another husband; indeed, that we may pass from hand to hand, as they say, that is, from the law to Christ.

He at the same time softens the asperity of the expression by saying that Christ, in order to join us to his own body, made us free from the yoke of the law. For though Christ, of his own accord, subjected himself to the law for a time, it is not right to say that the law ruled over him. Moreover, he conveys to his own members the liberty which he himself possesses. It is therefore no wonder that he exempts those from the yoke of the law whom he unites by a sacred bond to himself, so that they may be one body in him.

Even his who has been raised, etc. We have already said that Christ is substituted for the law, lest any freedom should be claimed without him, or lest anyone, not yet being dead to the law, should dare to divorce himself from it. But he adopts here a periphrastic sentence to denote the eternity of that life which Christ attained by his resurrection, so that Christians might know that this connection is to be perpetual. But he speaks more fully of the spiritual marriage between Christ and his Church in Ephesians 6.

That we may bring forth fruit to God. He always annexes the final cause, lest anyone should indulge the liberty of their flesh and their own lusts, under the pretense that Christ has delivered them from the bondage of the law. For he has offered us, together with himself, as a sacrifice to the Father, and he regenerates us for this purpose: that by newness of life we may bring forth fruit to God. We know that the fruits which our heavenly Father requires from us are those of holiness and righteousness.

It is indeed no lessening of our liberty that we serve God. Indeed, if we desire to enjoy so great a benefit as there is in Christ, it will not henceforth be right for us to entertain any other thought than that of promoting the glory of God, for which purpose Christ has connected us with himself. We will otherwise remain the bond-slaves not only of the law but also of sin and of death.

For when we were, etc. He shows still more clearly by stating the contrary effect how unreasonably the zealots of the law acted, who would still detain the faithful under its dominion. For as long as the literal teaching of the law, unconnected with the Spirit of Christ, rules and holds sway, the wantonness of the flesh is not restrained but, on the contrary, breaks out and prevails. From this, it follows that the kingdom of righteousness is not established, except when Christ emancipates us from the law.

Paul at the same time reminds us of the works which we ought to do when set free from the law. As long, then, as a person is kept under the yoke of the law, they can, as they are sinning continually, obtain nothing for themselves but death. Since bondage to the law produces sin only, then freedom, its opposite, must tend to righteousness; if the former leads to death, then the latter leads to life. But let us consider the very words of Paul.

In describing our condition during the time we were subject to the dominion of the law, he says that we were in the flesh. From this, we understand that all those who are under the law attain nothing else but this—that their ears are struck by its external sound without any fruit or effect, while they are inwardly destitute of the Spirit of God. They must therefore necessarily remain altogether sinful and perverse until a better remedy succeeds to heal their diseases. Observe also this usual phrase of Scripture, to be in the flesh; it means to be endowed only with the gifts of nature, without that peculiar grace with which God favors his chosen people. But if this state of life is altogether sinful, it is evident that no part of our soul is naturally sound, and that the power of free will is no other than the power of casting evil emotions as darts into all the faculties of the soul.

The emotions of sins, which are through the law, etc.: that is, the law excited in us evil emotions, which exerted their influence through all our faculties, for there is no part that is not subject to these depraved passions. What the law does, in the absence of the inward teacher, the Spirit, is increasingly to inflame our hearts so that they boil up with lusts. But observe here that the law is connected with the vicious nature of humankind, whose perversity and lusts break forth with greater fury the more they are checked by the restraints of righteousness. He further adds that as long as the emotions of the flesh were under the dominion of the law, they brought forth fruit to death; and he adds this to show that the law by itself is destructive. Therefore, it follows that they are infatuated who so much desire this bondage, which results in death.

But now we have been set free from the law, etc. He pursues the argument derived from the opposite effect of things: “If the restraint of the law achieved so little to restrain the flesh that it became, instead, the inciter of sin, then, so that we may cease from sin, we must necessarily be set free from the law.” Again, “If we are set free from the bondage of the law for this purpose, that we may serve God, then they act perversely who from this take the liberty to indulge in sin; and they speak falsely who teach that by this means free rein is given to lusts.” Observe, then, that we are freed from the law when God emancipates us from its rigid demands and curse, and endows us with His Spirit, through whom we walk in His ways.

Having died to that, etc. This part contains a reason, or rather, indicates the manner in which we are set free; for the law is abrogated for us to such an extent that we are not weighed down by its intolerable burden, and its unyielding rigor does not overwhelm us with a curse. In newness of spirit; He sets the spirit in opposition to the letter. For before our will is formed according to the will of God by the Holy Spirit, we have in the law nothing but the outward letter, which indeed restrains our external actions but does not in the slightest restrain the fury of our lusts. And he ascribes newness to the Spirit because it replaces the old man, just as the letter is called old because it perishes through the regeneration of the Spirit.