Sin, Taking Occasion by the Commandment, Wrought Death (Romans 7:9–13)

Rom 7:9–10. I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

“I was alive,”—in relation to what follows, means here: I lived; and “the commandment,”—in relation to what precedes, means the law. While, he says, there was no law, sin was dead, and I was alive; but when the law came, sin revived and began to live, and I died. What the death of sin without the law means was indicated by the words of the holy Fathers above—either non-recognition and not so clear recognition of sin, or its inactivity. Correspondingly, “I was alive”—in such a state of sin, because of the absence of the law, will mean: I lived without the law, because without it I did not recognize sin and did not so clearly recognize it, or because then sin slept in me and remained inactive. In contrast, the reviving of sin after the promulgation of the law will be—clearer recognition of it or bringing it into actuality—stirring it up; and the death of man or the soul will be—sinning with consciousness of sin, or being subject to all the harmful action of sin. The life of the soul lies in consciousness of the rightness of its action before God, before men, and before itself. When such consciousness is driven out by a manner of life, the life of the soul is not life, but anguish. Conscience enters into its rights and begins to gnaw at the soul, as a worm gnaws at wood or moth at cloth. While the law was not present, conscience was at peace; for it was not conscious of unlawfulness of deeds. But when the law revealed the whole realm of unlawfulness, conscience could not be at peace and silent; for its nature is to stand for God’s law. It raised its voice and began to torment man. As he, even under the law, remained in the same manner of action—sinful—he came to be, under it, under the constant torment of conscience, was as it were decomposing and dying, because of this internal discord. Sinning with consciousness of sin is the same for the soul as piercing the heart with a sword. The soul, in the act of sin, freezes. But as it is by nature not mortal, it again departs, as if it awakens, though no longer as it was before. A new conscious sin again strikes it, and it again awakens, but now even more weakly alive. So true life, with conscious sinning in it, is exhausted, and finally quite dies. It lives, for it is not mortal; but this life is no longer life. This consequence is hastened moreover by the fact that sin, at the appearance of the commandment opposed to it, comes into tension, as if a person prepared to stand up for itself. For, by bringing sin into tension, the law does not, however, give strength to resist it. And in this way it seems deliberately to hand man over to the power of sin. So when “the commandment came,” sin revives and the soul dies, if along with the commandment she is not also given strength to resist sin.

Oecumenius writes: “How did sin revive? Through the law. In what way? Thus: when the law was given, sin became more provoked to attacks on man and rushed more fiercely in every way to tempt him. As if suspecting that if man kept the commandments of the law, he would receive crowns, and therefore became more enraged against him. On the other hand, I too, says the Apostle in the person of man in general, having learned sin from the law, yet not ceasing to sin, came to sin by weightier sins, as one doing in knowledge that which ought to be shunned, and in this way drove sin deeper into myself and rooted it in myself, giving it greater power through conscious sinning and it, being weak and as if frozen, awakening and inflaming. But it, awakened, killed me; whereas before its awakening I lived more. Thus sin, after the promulgation of the law, revived in two ways: first, in that it was stirred up and provoked to more fierce attacks; second, in that we, with the law openly proclaimed, sinning consciously, deepened it in ourselves and gave it power to attack us with greater boldness. Thus it revived and I died. Having said: ‘sin revived,’—the Apostle showed that sin existed, only was silent, hiding as it were. The law, coming, revealed it, exposed it, with a beneficial purpose for us—so that, knowing it, we would flee it. Such benefit was not obtained from it for the reason that those who knew sin through it did not begin to flee it.”

We must bear in mind that the Apostle here sets forth history, what came about as a result of the law or what man made of the law, not touching upon God’s beneficent intentions in giving the law. And it is precisely this side he reveals, so as to make those under the law rush into the embrace of the Gospel, whose sanctifying actions were so evident to all. It would be unjust if someone were to infer from these words that the Apostle condemns the law unconditionally. Saint Chrysostom says: “Although this seems to tend toward blame of the law; nevertheless, whoever examines carefully will see in this praise of the law; because it did not produce sin, which had not existed before, but only revealed what was hidden (or less known). This is what is praiseworthy for the law. If before the law people sinned, not feeling the sin; then after the law, although they received no other fruit, at least thoroughly learned that they are sinning. And this is not a small way of liberation from vice. But if people were not liberated from vice, the law, which made every effort to turn them from it, is not responsible for this; all the blame falls on the will of men themselves, which has been corrupted beyond all expectation.” What happened here is what often happens in the treatment of diseases, as Blessed Theophylact remarks: “Suppose someone is sick and does not know that he is sick, then a physician comes and reveals to him that he is sick and that he must refrain from such food as increases the disease: the patient did not obey and died.” Clearly the physician is not to blame, but the patient.

Rom 7:10. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be to death.

Behold what came about because of sin dwelling in us! The commandment was given to give life—to give us more life and fill us with true life: “Do this, and you shall live” (Rom 10:5); but since, yielding to sin, we did not fulfill it, so, sinning under it consciously, we thereby suppressed, stifled, and killed in ourselves the true life proper to us. And the life-giving “commandment was found to be to death. Was found”—expresses the unexpectedness of such an outcome. One thing was intended, but another, quite opposite, came about. “For this reason precisely the Apostle said: ‘was found,’—wishing to show that one was the purpose of the law, but another came about because of sin (that is, self-gratification)” (Blessed Theodoret). “He did not say: it became death or produced death; but: ‘was found to be to death,’—explaining thereby the unusualness and strangeness of such an incongruity, for which the people themselves alone are responsible. If you wish to know the purpose of the law, it led to life, for which it was given; but if death resulted from it, those who received the commandment are responsible for this, not the commandment itself, which leads to life” (Saint Chrysostom). “The Apostle puts everything in defense of the law and the commandment, but exposes the wickedness of sin. For he says: the commandment is a giver of life; but turning to the worse brought forth death” (Blessed Theodoret).

Let no one pass over without attention the word of the Apostle: “the commandment, which was ordained to life.” Though the Apostle clearly speaks of the Old Testament law, by this expression he also designates the power of the commandment in general. The essence of the commandment is to lead to life and flow forth life to those who live according to it. The commandment is an expression of God’s will concerning how we should act. And all that exists lives according to God’s will: in creation the laws of God’s will are placed in all things; in providence they are preserved by the same will of God, and all is directed to the final end by this same will. The commandment reigns everywhere. One entering upon the path of the commandments enters into accord with all that exists—both with the intelligent world of Angels and the material world, and, first of all, with God Himself—plunges into the stream of universal life, moved and produced by the all-living will of God. This is why the Apostle said: “ordained to life.” The nature of the commandment is such as to give the taste of life. The Gospel and the whole economy of salvation are life-giving in that they give the believer the possibility to abide in that order of life which the commandment requires. To this end is the word of God, to this end is grace. And the Apostle seems to cast a shadow over the law and commandment not so as to awaken aversion to them, but so as to urge one to turn to Christ by faith (Oecumenius) and, receiving from Him justification and sanctification, to become capable of living according to the commandment, or according to God’s will, or even of living in no other way than thus.

Rom 7:11. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

He explains how “the commandment, which was ordained to life, was found to be to death.” Sin, he says, taking the commandment as a starting point, deceived me and, plunging me into deeds contrary to the commandment, killed me. Sin here is our root sinfulness, whose essence is self-gratification: I myself, I so wish, it seems good and pleasant to me, I wish to know no other considerations. The commandment submits us to God’s will, while sin teaches us to gratify ourselves in opposition to God’s will. The commandment, by submitting to God’s will, leads into the stream of universal life; but sin, withdrawing from submission to God’s will for the sake of self-gratification, tears us from this stream and plunges us into a realm alien to life—dead and deadly.

How does sin succeed in this? Through deception. It contrives to present deeds contrary to the commandment in such a light that it seems to a man that it is far better, even more reasonable, to act against the commandment than according to it. For example: someone has been wronged. The commandment commands: forgive. But sin comes and suggests: if you forgive, they will trample you, mix you with dirt—and you won’t be able to live. Better stand up for yourself; prove that you cannot be touched with impunity. And there will be nothing wrong with that. The law of justice demands it.—It seems to a man, from such reasoning, that it is better not to forgive—and he does not forgive. In reality, it is better to forgive; but not to forgive only seems better, but is not. So man has been deceived. As in this case, so it happens in every deed contrary to the commandment. Sin contrives so to present the matter that it seems better to act against the commandment, and deceives. He does not generally rebel against the commandment or dispute that the commandments ought to be fulfilled. But in every particular action he will surely get in the way and try to turn away from what the commandment requires, always using the same trick—presenting it as better in this case to act other than the commandment commands. And it turns out that man, knowing that he ought to live according to the commandments, being convinced of this, and even having it in mind so to act, acts contrary to the commandments. Such is the deception of sin! In every sin is repeated what happened with our first parents. There the enemy personally presented it as better to act against the commandment, and in us, instead of him, the seed of sin sown by him produces the same effect, though it is also true that he does not remain idle at this (Blessed Theodoret, Oecumenius, and Ambrosiaster).

In the present text the Apostle says the same as he said above: “sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence.” Here he only explains how it wrought this concupiscence and what was the consequence. It deceived—and produced concupiscence contrary to the commandment; concupiscence, “when it has conceived,” brought forth sin; and sin, accomplished, brought forth death (Jas 1:15) (Oecumenius).

Rom 7:12. Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.

“Therefore” – signifies that the following discourse is a conclusion from what precedes: from all that has been said follows, or: you yourselves see. And if one supposes that the Apostle has in mind the vindication of himself, then this discourse may be completed thus: so I do not condemn the Law and do not blaspheme it; on the contrary, I affirm that it is holy and the rest.

“The Law is holy, and the commandment is holy.” The Law and the commandment mean one and the same thing: the Old Testament economy. But some make a distinction between them, and that in different senses. Blessed Theodoret says that by the Law is understood the Mosaic Law, but by the commandment the commandment given in paradise. Holy Chrysostom cites the interpretations of some, as if the Law signifies natural law and the commandment the commandment of paradise; and, rejecting them as wrong, proves firmly by the drift of the discourse that here is understood one and the same Mosaic Law. Blessed Theophylact, understanding the discourse in the same way, supposes only that the Apostle here “distinguishes Law from commandment, as the general from the particular: for in the Law one thing comprises the dogmas, and another the commandments. Both the dogmas of the Law are holy, and the commandments concerning conduct are holy and just and good.”

“The commandment is holy and just and good.” Such is the whole Old Testament economy! Holy, as proceeding from the Holy God, teaching holiness and guiding to it; just, as established by a just God, establishing all things justly and joining them justly with faithfulness to Him—prosperity, and with unfaithfulness—wretchedness; good, as laid upon those receiving it by a good God, not for burden but for the ordering of life here and blessedness after death. Blessed Theodoret writes: “The divine Apostle called the commandment ‘holy’ as having taught what is due; ‘just’ as pronouncing righteous judgment on transgressors; ‘good’ as preparing life for those keeping it.” Oecumenius thus defines these characteristics: the Law is “holy” because it preserved from uncleanness those observing it; “just” because it rewarded those fulfilling it with gifts and imposed punishments on transgressors; “good” because it did not chastise transgressors with wretchedness for its own pleasure or out of wrath, but for their salvation, welfare, and correction, and also because it rewarded great things for small improvements and instructed and punished those sinning not in proportion to their transgressions. Blessed Theophylact adds: “Here the Apostle very clearly stopped the mouths of Marcionites, Manicheans, Simonians, and all who despised the Old Testament. From these words it is clear that the Law and the commandment are the ordinances of a good and just God—not as these heretics blasphemed, saying that the Law comes from an evil god.”

Rom. 7:13. Is then that which is good made death to me? By no means! But sin, in order that it might appear as sin, was producing death in me through that which is good, so that sin through the commandment became exceedingly sinful.

Is this good thing—the Law that is holy and just and good—“become death to me”—was it deadly to me, did it bring me death and cause it? – “By no means” – it is impossible to think thus—neither do I so suppose, and no one should permit himself such a thought. Neither by the intention of the Lawgiver nor by the nature of the Law can this be, can it be expected, and should it be reasoned thus. It is not the Law that is death-dealing, but sin dwelling in us. It teaches to break the Law given for our good, and in this way causes death. This sin is so evil that it even turns good into evil for us; just as a corrupted stomach turns even healthy food into an intensification of disease. The Law revealed this harmfulness of sin, which, among other things, was given for the very purpose of drawing out the evil of sin lying concealed in us, placing it in such circumstances that it clearly turns good into death. The Apostle stirs up hatred against sin by pointing out to us such a malicious enemy. In other places such a manner of expression: “in order that it might appear” – indicates a consequence; so that, in this manner, here it would turn out: and it appeared that sin and so forth. But here such an expression indicates a purpose. The Law was also given for the purpose that it might appear that sin even turns good into evil; just as sometimes doctors give medicines so that a disease hidden inside breaks out externally. “The Law succeeded greatly in this, showing what an evil sin is, exposing and displaying all its poisonousness” (Holy Chrysostom). “By Law and commandment sin is shown to me, is shown, that is, how it is bad and evil. How? – ‘Producing death in me through that which is good.’ By the fruit I know the tree; seeing death, I begin to hate the mother of death. And the teacher for me in this is the Law” (blessed Theodoret).

By sin here is understood “careless will, striving toward evil and corruption of the heart—wherein lies the cause of all evils” (Holy Chrysostom)—“will inclined to pleasures and striving toward sin” (blessed Theophylact)—“the inclination of our will toward evil” (blessed Theodoret). Its essence lies in self-pleasing in defiance of all.

That sin through the commandment became exceedingly sinful. A second good effect of the Law. There—an exposure of the harmfulness of sin, and here—an indication of its extreme sinfulness. Sin is always sinful, as committed with awareness of its sinfulness, with contempt for the clear will of the Lawgiver—God. “Even nature teaches us about sin” (blessed Theodoret); but by nature alone, one might by some perversion reconcile it with righteousness; when the Law clearly indicates what is due, and sin, despite this, gains strength, then sinning does not happen with a quiet conscience, but directly against it. Such sinning is extremely sinful both before God and before conscience. “Now this: ‘became exceedingly sinful’ – is said with an omission; to be understood: ‘became’ manifest – that is: that it might become manifest because of the commandment that sin is exceedingly sinful or evil” (blessed Theodoret, and so also blessed Theophylact, Oecumenius, and Photius in him). Perhaps here sin may be understood as all the totality of actual sins which became more sinful under the Law, whereas in the preceding expression is understood sin dwelling in us, producing actual sins.

Holy Chrysostom points out here that “the Apostle intensifies the depiction of sin so as to show the surpassing nature of Christ’s grace and teach from what evil mankind was delivered by it, after all medical remedies had intensified the disease and all means to stop the evil had increased it.” And a bit further: “By this the Apostle also proves the excellence of grace, an excellence, not a contradiction. Do not look to the fact that those who received the Law became worse; but consider that the Law not only did not wish to intensify evil but, on the contrary, sought to cut off the evil that existed before it. And if it was not able to accomplish this, crown it for the disposition. But with the deepest devotion throw yourself before the almightiness of Christ; because Christ rooted out and destroyed so varied and insurmountable evil (sin).”

Having thus vindicated the Law and laid all blame on sin dwelling in us, the Apostle now proceeds to depict what this sin is and how it acts in us.