How Does a Catholic Read: Romans 9:1-24

In previous posts I have highlighted the importance of free-will being a real element in the Christian doctrine of salvation.  If there is no room for human freedom, then we’re left to conclude that there are some folks whom God doesn’t want to save.  And yet, it would seem that scripture teaches the opposite.

However, our Calvinist friends will point out that Scripture does indeed teach this intolerable conclusion.  Namely, in the first half of the 9th chapter of Paul’s letter to the Romans.

Today I wanted to look at this most troubling set of passages.



A Desperate Man:

In Romans 1-8, Paul is talking about the doctrine of salvation.  At the beginning of Romans 9 he changes the topic slightly.  He begins considering the situation of his Jewish brethren who didn’t convert, particularly those in Jerusalem.

Paul begins with the remarkable statement that he would gladly trade his salvation if it would mean his own people would come to Christ.  He says:

“I am speaking the truth in Christ—I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit— that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises.  To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.” - Romans 9:1-5

Abraham’s True Son:

Now he gets into the difficult bits.  He begins putting his people’s rejection of Christ into a theological context: 

“But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but ‘Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.’   This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. For this is what the promise said: ‘About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.’" - Romans 9:6-9 

As one reads Genesis, one can easily be confused by the status of Abraham’s child Ishmael.  Ishmael was conceived when Sarah and Abraham got impatient with God’s promise of a son.  So they conspired to forcibly fulfill God’s promise by having Abraham inseminate their maidservant Hagar.  The resulting child, Ishmael, is technically Abraham’s first son.  However, Scripture nonetheless sometimes refers to Isaac, the child eventually born of Sarah, as Abraham’s “only son”. 

That's... odd.

Here Paul offers an explanation for that language.  It is only the children “of promise” who are counted as Abraham’s children.  In like fashion, Paul seems to be saying his kinsmen who rejected Jesus were not true Israelites.

So Paul is illustrating a concept for us here which will be used throughout the remainder of this section of the letter.  That is, there has always been those in whom God’s promises are being fulfilled and those in whom they aren’t.


Election Results:

Paul continues illustrating this concept with the following generation, Jacob and Esau:

“And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— she was told, ‘The older will serve the younger.’  As it is written, ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.’” - Romans 9:10-13

He points out that before they’d been born, God had already chosen Jacob to fulfill His purposes.  This means it wasn't in response to anything they did.  It was nothing either of them earned.  It was something God simply chose.

One thing to note here is the use of the word “loved” and “hated”.  One quirk of the Hebrew language is its lack of comparison words.  In matters of preference there was simply the word “love” and “hate”.  Consequently, when the word “hate” is used in this fashion it doesn’t always literally mean “despise”.

You can see this in Luke 14:26 when Jesus says, “Whoever does not hate his father and mother cannot be my disciple.”  Jesus does not actually expect us to despise our parents.  Matthew 10:23 renders this more helpfully as, “Whoever loves his mother or father to me is not worthy of me.”

It can also be noted here that the question of eternal salvation hasn’t been raised yet.  Paul is only talking about whom God is principally working through.


Mercy Upon Whom:

OK, we’re still talking about God’s plan of election.  Isaac over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau.  We’re looking at the question of who God makes the star of the show, and who He doesn’t.  It's in this  context that Paul says the following:

“What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! For He says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’  So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, ‘For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.’  So then He has mercy on whomever He wills, and He hardens whomever He wills.” – Romans 9:14-18

Paul turns to Pharaoh in Egypt as an example of someone who wasn’t just passed over, but got used as the fall guy.  That appears to be the primary meaning of the phrase, “Mercy upon whom I have mercy, compassion for whom I have compassion.”  The compassion being spoken of is whether God decides you’re going to be part of he winning or losing team - the chosen or unchosen.

To further illustrate the point, one may read the story of the Ten Plagues and ask:

“Why did an Egyptian child have to die in the 10th plague and a Hebrew child get spared?”  

Or perhaps the story of the Hebrews conquering the Holy Land and ask:

 “Why does a child in Jericho have to fall by a Hebrew sword?”  

These are very emotionally difficult questions, but Paul is saying it comes down to God’s will.

Hardened:

There is another question which arises from this section about the concept of God “hardening” people.  Is God deciding that some people will be bad guys?  Is He making people evil?

Well, we can’t say that God is making people to be evil.  As the letter of Saint James says:

“When tempted, no one should say, ‘God is tempting me.’ For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone.” – James 1:13

So what is going on?

Well, there is another phenomenon found in Scripture where God confirms people in the evil which they have chosen.  This is the pattern we see with Pharaoh.  In Exodus 8:15, Exodus 8:32, and Exodus 9:34 it says Pharaoh hardened his own heart.  But in Exodus 9:12 and Exodus 10:1 it says God hardened his heart.  So what could be happening is that first he hardened his heart, then God consigned him to stay that way - or even allows him to dig himself deeper into his hole.

A similar thing is seen in 2Thessalonians 2:9-12 and Romans 1:18-25.  In the former, Paul says:

“The coming of the lawless one is apparent in the working of Satan, who uses all power, signs, lying wonders, and every kind of wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion, leading them to believe what is false, so that all who have not believed the truth but took pleasure in unrighteousness will be condemned.” – 2 Thessalonians 2:9-12

So it says here that first these people refused to love the truth.  In response, God is said to send them a powerful delusion.  That is, God confirms them in their evil choices by not offering them the grace they need to get out of it.

Likewise in Romans 1 it says:

“Claiming to be wise, they became fools; and they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling a mortal human being or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles.  Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the degrading of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.” – Romans 1:18-25

Once again, Paul notes that the pagans refused to worship God.  God says in response, “Fine.”

Thus, when Paul speaks of God “hardening” folks in Romans 9, one plausible way to understand this is that God has the prerogative to not lift people out of the disobedience they’ve chosen for themselves.  And God can then make use of their evil for a higher purpose.

Let's recall for a moment that Paul got onto this subject while trying to explain why the Jews in Jerusalem rejected Jesus.  As it applies to them, their persecution of the Christians was instrumental in the Gospel going out to the Gentiles.  Paul sees this as God providentially leaving them in their disobedience for the sake of the nations.


The Potter’s Prerogative:

Time for the final section.  Here Paul uses the analogy of a potter with clay:

“You will say to me then, ‘Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?’ But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?

Will the molded say to its molder, ‘Why have you made me like this?’  Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?

What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?”  – Romans 9:19-24

Now Paul entertains some hypothetical objections to what he just taught.  If God consigns people to their disobedience, how can that be fair for them?  Paul responds by saying a potter has the prerogative to make pots for his own purposes.

I want to call special attention to the phrase “prepared for destruction” in verse 22.  Does this phrase indicate God has prepared people for damnation?  There’s two reasons to think otherwise.

First, the “destruction” being spoken of there does not necessarily mean damnation.  It could mean physical destruction, as was the case for the Egyptians and the Canaanites.  Or, as the case would later be, the desolation of Jerusalem in 70AD.

Second, there is a quirk in the Greek which might make one ask, “Who is preparing these folks for destruction?”  The Greek word for “having been prepared/fitted” is in the Greek Middle Voice.  The Middle Voice describes an instance where the subject acts upon himself/herself.  So one could read this as a person preparing himself to be a vessel of destruction.

That would fit in well with the preceding words: “God [] has endured with much patience the vessels…”  Think back to what we said before.  First these people reject God in disobedience.  Then God confirms them in it.  So we can understand this as God enduring these people as they prepare themselves for destruction.  Then He confirms them in their obedience for a greater cause.

[Side note: Another example of this might be God not sending the Hebrews into the promised land until the inequities of the Canaanites was full.]  


Did God Want Their Damnation?

Let’s return to the big question.  Does Romans 9 mean that God creates some people for the sole purpose of damning them?  Does God not want them to repent?  Is the way of salvation closed to them?

Well, let’s consider the very people whom Paul was talking about; the Jews who had rejected Jesus in Jerusalem.  There are three passages which might help us out.  The first comes from Luke’s Gospel:

“Jesus said, ‘I tell you, among those born of women no one is greater than John; yet the least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.’ And all the people who heard this, including the tax collectors, acknowledged the justice of God, because they had been baptized with John’s baptism. But by refusing to be baptized by him, the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God’s purpose for themselves.” - Luke 07:28-30

So we see here that when the temple authorities rejected John’s call to repentance, they rejected God’s purpose for their lives.  God wanted them to repent.

Further, Paul, right after his discourse in Romans 9, reflects on the salvation of the men he’s been talking about.  He says:

“Brothers and sisters, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. I can testify that they have a zeal for God, but it is not enlightened.” - Romans 10:1 

We can see here that Paul still believes these people have a possibility of salvation. 

Lastly, in Romans 11:23, he leaves open the possibilities that they might not persist in unbelief:

"And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again." - Romans 11:23

Thus, one can conclude that Paul did not intend the preceding verses to mean these people were predestined to hell.


To Conclude:

Romans 9 is frequently used to propose that God has made certain people for the expressed purpose of eternal damnation.  However, this stands in direct contradiction to passages which clearly state that Jesus died for everyone, and God desires the salvation of all men.

A close examination of Romans 9 paints a different picture.Instead, we see how God has the right to choose some folks over others when acting out His providential plan.  We also see Paul describing situations where a person (or civilization) rejects God.  God patiently endures them, but eventually leaves them to their devices - confirming them in the evil they've chosen.  God can then make use of their disobedience in service to higher goods.

In the case of the Jews in Jerusalem who rejected Christ, Paul sees perceives that God is allowing this so the Gospel will go out to the Gentiles.  However, he still hopes that these folks will one day be saved.  This means Romans 9 is NOT saying God made them for hell.