Potiphars house blessed because of Ioseph Gen. 39.3 Masters therefore should have a speciall care to make choyce of godly servants that God may blesse the worke under their hands Perer. CHAP. XXXI 1. The Contents IN this Chapter first we have Iacobs departure from Laban with his wives and children and cattell where wee have 1. The occasion that moved Iacob the murmuring of Labans sonnes and change of Labans countenance vers 1 2. 2. The Commandement of God for Iacobs departure vers 3. 3. Iacobs consultation with his wives first Iacob maketh report of his faithfull service vers 6. Labans churlish dealing vers 7 8. of Gods blessing vers 10. to vers 14. then his wives give their consent vers 14. to 15. and so Iacob departeth he and his vers 17. to 22. Secondly there is described Labans pursuit and expostulation with Iacob where is set forth Labans accusation and Iacobs recrimination 1. Laban accuseth Iacob of two things the secret carrying away of his daughters vers 26 27. the stealing away of his gods vers 30. Iacob defendeth himselfe in shewing the cause why he went a way secretly vers 31. in giving Laban leave to search for his gods which hee doth but findeth them not by reason of Rachels excuse to vers 36. 2. Iacob againe accuseth Laban for his hard dealing making profession of his great travell and faithfull service and Gods blessing to 42. then Laban yeeldeth himselfe vers 43. Thirdly there is declared in this Chapter how Iacob and Laban make a covenant together 1. The covenant it selfe is expressed vers 49. to 52. 2. The ratification of it of each side by an oath and ceremonies Laban sweareth by the God of Nahor 53. and together with Iacob maketh an heape of stones vers 47 48. Iacob sweareth by the feare of his father Isaack 53. and offereth sacrifice vers 54 55. 2. The divers readings v. 1. And Iacob heard S. T. and he heard cater hath gotten all this substance C. all this glory caet cabhor glorie v. 5. the God of my father was with me caet the word of the God of my father was my helpe C. v. 7. your father hath lied unto me C. hath mocked me T. hath deceived me caet hatal signifieth all these hath changed my reward or wages often lambs so also vers 41. S. ten times or turnes caeter manah a portion v. 8. if he said the white shall be thy reward they brought forth white H.S. if hee said the particoloured G. or ring-straked B. or spotted C. or spotted in the legs T. gnà cadh to binde whereof commeth the word here used that signifieth them that are spotted in the binding places that is the shankes and the legs v. 10. of divers colours H. sprinkled as with ashes S. spotted or party B.G.C. spotted as with haile heb baradh signifieth haile T. v. 13. I am the God which appeared unto thee in the place of God S. I am the God of Bethel cater v. 14. have we had as yet any portion B. is there yet any more portion for us in our fathers house caet for they could not say that they had hitherto no part seeing it followeth in the next verse vers 16. all the riches which God hath taken from our father is ours c. v. 15. and should he also devoure our money T. should wee suffer him still to devoure that God hath given us and hath eaten also our money caet v. 18. he tooke all his cattell and houshold stuffe S. all his cattell and goods cat v. 20. and he would not confesse to his father in law H. he concealed from Laban the Aramite S. C. stole away the heart of Laban B.G. he stole away from Laban as v. 27. or deceived the heart of Laban Tr. v. 23. he tooke his sonnes and brethren S. his brethren caet that is kinsfolkes v. 24. that thou speake nothing bitterly to Iacob H. that thou speake not evill S. that thou speake ought save good B.G. that thou speake neither good nor bad that is concerning his returning againe T. heb from good to bad P.C. v. 29. it is in my hand through God B. there is power in my hand caet cel is the name of God it signifieth also strength v. 31. that I departed without thy knowledge I feared c. I was afraid and said lest thou wouldest have taken thy daughters cat v. 32. the place where thou findest thy God let it not remaine C. with whom thou findest thy gods let him be slaine before our brethren H. with whom thou findest c. let him not live caeter and he found or knew nothing with him added by the Septuag v. 36. so the sollicitude or care of the searcher was marked H. Laban searched through all the house and found not the idols S.G. Laban tossed or handled all the tent C.B.T. mashesh to feele to handle v. 38. were not barren H.S.G. cast not their young C.P.T.B. shacall to be deprived of young v. 40. what was stollen thou didst require of me H. what was wanting of the number thou diddest require of me I kept them by day and by night C. of my hand didst thou require what was stollen by day or night caeter v. 43. are mine and my daughters S. are mine c. v. 47. Laban called it the heape is witnesse Iacob called it the heape of witnesse H.S. Laban called it legar sahadutha Iacob called it Galeed caet gnal is an hillocke or heape gnedh a witnesse put together gnalgnedh v. 49. and Laban added c. H. and he called it a watch tower S.C. and he called it Mispah G.B.T. v. 54 and he offered sacrifice H.S. Iacob offered sacrifice caet they did eat and drinke S. they did eat caeter 3. The explanation of doubâ—full questions QUEST I. How Laban had changed Iacobs wages ten times Vers. 7. HE hath changed my wages ten times 1. Neither Cajetans exposition is to bee received that his wages was not so often changed but it is saith he an hyperbolicall speech for where the words may be taken properly what need a figure to be admitted 2. Rasi is in the other extreme who taketh the word monim here used for ten peeces of coine so that he would have his wages changed ten times ten times that is an hundred times 3. Hierome taketh it literally and so doth Augustine that he was deceived twice every yeare for the five last the first not counted because twice in every yeare in Italy and likewise in Mesopotamia the Ewes have young as Hierome alleageth out of Virgil bis gravidae pecudes â—wes twice with young 4. The Septuag read for ten times or turnes ten lambs which Augustine would justifie because a lamb may be taken for the lambing time as arista an eare of corne is taken for harvest and so their meaning should be that Iacob was deceived ten lambing times q. 95. in Genes But it is more
confutation 1. Confut. Against the vulgar Latine translation Vers. 18. ANd hee was a Priest c. The Latine text readeth here corruptly for hee was as though the bringing forth of bread and wine had beene an act of his Priesthood Indeed this copulative Vau sometime is used as a causall but then the sense apparantly giveth it as Genes 20.3 Thou art but dead because of the woman which thou hast taken for she is a mans wife in Hebrew and she is But here there is no such cause to annexe this clause as a reason of the former but rather it is to be joyned to that which followeth as the same copulative sheweth And he blessed him saying v. 19. wherefore not the producing of bread wine but the blessing of Abraham was the proper act of Melchisedecks Priesthood 2. Confut. Melchisedeck brought not out the bread and wine to sacrifice them BRought forth bread and wine c. 1. Whether Melchisedeck had before slaine sacrifices and made a feast not only of bread and wine but of flesh as Philo saith mactatis victimis splendidum opulum sâ—ciis omnibus dedit to Abraham and his company the text saith nothing and therefore I leave it as an uncertaine guesse sure I am that mactare victimas to slay sacrifices can in no sense be understood of sacrificing or offering of bread as Pererius goeth about to wrest it disput 5. in 14 Genes 2. Neither did he bring forth bread and wine to represent as Rabbi Moses thinketh sacrificia farmacea the sacrifices in the law of meale and floure 3. Much lesse did he offer them in sacrifice to God as Bellarmine and Pererius doe urge this place for the word jatsah here used is never taken to signifie to offer in sacrifice whereas Bellarmine and Pererius object that place Iud. 6.19 where Gideon is said to bring forth his gift and represent it where the same word is found it is evident that Gideon brought it forth the flesh and broth for the Angell to eat of whom he supposed to be a man for they used not to make pottage or broth to offer and the Angell bid him to offer it upon the stone which sheweth that Gideon had no such purpose before 4. Wherefore as Iosephus well noteth Melchisedeck milites Abraham hospitaliter accepit nihil eis ad victum deesse passus he entertained Abrahams souldiers with great hospitality suffering them to want no victuals Melchisedeck then brought forth the bread and wine for no other end but to refresh Abrahams company 1. For Melchisedeck is set forth both as a King and a Priest the producing of bread and wine was a princely gift the blessing of Abraham a priestly act 2. It was the use and manner to meet them that returned from battell with bread to refresh them therefore Moab and Ammon are accursed because they met not the Israelites with bread and water when they came out of Egypt Deut 23.4 3. Cajetane a chiefe pillar of the popish Church saith Nihil hic scribitur de oblatione sed de prolatione panis vini Nothing is written of the oblation but of the prolation or producing of bread and wine 4. Whereas Lyranus Tostatus and Bellarmine answer that Melchisedeck needed not to have brought forth bread and wine for their refreshing seeing they had sufficient already as Abraham saith vers 24. saving that the young men had eaten Pererius one of their owne friends doth easily remove this answer that this was unknowne to Melchisedeck what provision was in Abrahams campe and though hee had knowne it yet to shew his love and testifie his gladnesse he would notwithstanding have performed this friendly and liberall part Mercerus 3. Confut. Melchisedecks Priesthood consisted not in the sacrificing of bread and wine NOw it followeth to be declared wherein the priesthood of Melchisedeck consisted and in what principallity he represented the everlasting Priesthood of Christ. 1. It consisted not in that Melchisedeck was a perpetuall virgin Perer. for if Sem were Melchisedeck which is most probable as before is declared he had a wife 2. Neither was he a figure of Christ because he sacrificed in bread and wine and so represented as the Papists imagine the unbloudy sacrifice of the Masse for these reasons 1. Because the Scripture maketh no mention of sacrificing but onely bringing forth bread and wine for Abrahams refreshing 2. That wherein Melchisedecks priesthood consisted must bee divers from the offering and sacrifices of Aaron but Aarons priests offered bread and wine Ergo herein consisted not Milchisedecks priesthood 3. There is a great unlikelinesse betweene Melchisedecks offering and the sacrifice of the Masse for he offered bread and wine in substance but the papists imagine that in the Masse there remaineth nothing but the formes not the substance of bread and wine 4. If Melchisedecks priesthood did stand in the oblation of bread and wine then every bald Masse-priest that sacrificeth in the Masse should be a Priest after Melchisedecks order whereas it is peculiar to Christ onely Psal. 110.4 Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedeck 5. Neither would the Apostle have omitted this speciall act of Melchisedecks priesthood wherein he represented Christ of purpose setting forth the comparison betweene Melchisedeck and Abraham for neither were thâ— faithfull Hebrewes uncapable of the doctrine of the Eucharist as Bellarmine imagineth seeing he treateth of as high mysteries as of baptisme and the resurrection chap. 6.2 and why should they be more uncapable than the Corinthians among the Gentiles whom Saint Paul instructeth concerning the Eucharist chap. 11. Neither as Pererius answereth was it a thing impertinent to make mention of Melchisedecks sacrifice of bread and wine if there had beene any such thing seeing the Apostle toucheth all other points of similitude and agreement betweene Christ and Melchisedeck and therefore would not have omitted this wherein they were most like 6. Whereas the fathers are objected that doe apply Melchisedecks bringing forth bread and wine to the Eucharist 1. The Apostle herein ought to prevaile more than all the fathers beside who maketh no such application 2. The Fathers doe not thereby shadow forth the Sacrament of the Eucharist as Ambrose saith Constat sacrificium pâ—riisse c. manere Melchisedeki instatutum quod totâ— orbe terrarum in sacramentorum erogatione celebratur c. The sacrifices of beasts are perished and the institution of Melchisedeck remaineth which is celebrated in the dispensation of the Sacraments The Fathers conclude a Sacrament not a sacrifice of bread and wine and so their testimonies make little for the popish sacrifice of the Masse 7. Many things are unlike betweene Melchisedecks producing bread and wine and the Masse Priests sacrificing He 1. presenteth them unto Abraham they offer them to God 2. Abraham and his company eat of Melchisedecks provision in the Masse the Priest doth all there is no eating or drinking 3. Melchisedeck blesseth Abraham
their father together Gen. 35.29 3. But whereas some inferre hereupon that Esau being thus ready to be reconciled to Iacob did follow his fathers precepts and doctrine and therefore doubt not but that he was saved it cannot be hence concluded certaine it is that Esau posterity did wholly fall away from the worship of God Mercer QUEST IV. Why Ioseph is named before Rachel Vers. 7. AFter Ioseph and Rachel drew neare c. 1. Ioseph is not put before Rachel that he might keepe her from Esau his rage and violence left hee might desire her being a beautifull woman as R. Salomon for Ioseph was but six yeare old and therefore not able to preserve his mother from any such attempts 2. Some thinke because Ioseph was Rachels onely sonne and dearely beloved of her he is named first Mercer 13. But it is more like that Ioseph being the youngest of all the rest went before his mother as mothers use to put their little ones first and so he is named according to his place Iun. QUEST V. Why Esau refused Iacobs present Vers. 8. WHat meanest thou by all this drove c. 1. The Hebrewes note that Esau his questions are short Iacobs answers large because it is the manner of proud stately men to speake briefly and hardly to bring forth halfe their words and beside Iacob often in his speech maketh mention of God so doth not Esau. 2. Esau asketh not whose droves these were as ignorant thereof but because he would in Iacobs presence take occasion to refuse the present 〈◊〉 2. It seemeth that Esau had not accepted of the present by the way which Iacob had sent before noâ— as Ramban thinketh as though the messengers were afraid of Esaus company and so fled away neither did Esau refuse it of hatred to his brother for Iacobs prayer was heard and it began presently to take effect neither yet doth Esau in refusing the present yeeld therein the birth-right to Iacob but he deserteth the receit thereof till he came to Iacob that he might shew his brotherly affection frankly and freely not purchased before or procured by any gift or present Iun. QUEST VI. How Iacob saith he had seene the face of Esau at the face of God Vers. 10. I Have seene thy face as if I had seene the face of God 1. Iacob flattereth not as some thinke to insinuate himselfe to his brother sic Tostat. but he speaketh from his heart 2. Neither as the Hebrewes doth Iacob to terrifie his brother make mention of that vision wherein he saw the Angell face to face 3. Not yet doth he meane as the Chalde readeth that he had seene the face as of some great or excellent man 4. Not as Augustine conjâ—ctureth by the name of God here doth hee understand such as the gods of the Gentiles were Sic non prajudicatur honori Dei And so these words doe not prejudice the honour of the true God in that he resembleth Esaus face to the face of God quaest 105. in Genes for Iacob was farre off from assuming into his mouth the name of the heathen gods 5. But in the effect Iacob saith thus much that he acknowledged this to be Gods worke that Esau was thus reconciled toward him and the friendly countenance of his brother hee taketh as an argument of the favour of God toward him Mercer Calvin Iun. QUEST VII By what reason Iacob perswaded Esau to accept of his present Vers. 11. TAke my blessing Iacob useth divers reasons to perswade Esau to take his present 1. Take it of my hand that is who am thy brother Marlor 2. He calleth it a blessing not in the passive sense as where with God had blessed him but in the active they used to blesse in the offering of their gifts this therefore should be a signe of perfect reconciliation that thereby they should take occasion one to blesse another Mercer 3. It is brought theâ— that is I have sorted it out and appointed it for thee let me not lose my labour 4. I have enough God hath blessed me it shall be no hinderance unto mee if thou accept of my present Vatab. QUEST VIII Whether Iacob lied in saying he would goe to mount Seir to his brother Vers. 14. TIll I come to my Lord into Seir. 1. Some thinke that Iacob did goe to Seir to his brother though it be not mentioned in the story but it appeareth by Iacobs excuse that if he feared to accompany his brother in the way he had greater cause to feare his brother at home in his owne Countrey 2. Some thinke that this was officio sâ—m mendacium an officious lie Tostat. and that Iacob promised one thing and purposed another Calvin But where the Patriarks acts may otherwise be defended we should not easily yeeld them to be infirmities 3. The Hebrewes make a mystery here as where Iacob saith Let my Lord goe before and I will follow they apply it to Esaus posterity who had the government of Kings 600. yeares before Israel had any King and in that Iacob promiseth to goe up to Seir they referre the accomplishment thereof till the comming of Messiah according to the prophesie of Obadiah vers 21. The Saviours shall come vp to mount Sion to judge the mount of Esau. But it is evident that Iacob here hath no such mysticall meaning speaking of his owne comming in his owne person 4. Wherefore it is rather like that Iacob did thinke to goe to Seir and so purposed but yet conditionally if God would or if he should see nothing to the contrary Iun. As all such promises are hypotheticall and conditionall and that upon better reasons he afterward changed his minde or was otherwise directed by the Lord Lyranus As Saint Paul purposed to goe into Spaine but it is like that he was otherwise letted and came not thithither QUEST IX Whether Saint Paul according to his purpose were ever in Spaine ANd here by the way though it be the opinion of divers ancient writers as of Cyrillus Athanasius Chrysostome Hierome to whom subscribe Tostatus Pererius that Saint Paul according to his determination was in Spaine yet it is more probable that being otherwise hindered hee arrived not there at all 1. Because he purposed to passe by Rome into Spaine Rom. 15.28 and to be brought on his way thitherward by the disciples of Rome vers 24. But when Saint Paul came to Rome he remained as a prisoner in his house having a souldier appointed to keepe him and so continued two yeares Act. 28.16 30. therefore it is not like that he was at liberty then to hold his purpose 2. Saint Paul being at Rome if he were thence delivered which is uncertaine did visit the East Churches presently Heb. 13.19 that I may be restored to you more quickly and purposed to continue and remaine with them Philip. 1.25 This I am sure that I shall abide and with you all continue If he quickly and speedily returned to the East Churches and
be one people with them which they could not doe with those which were uncircumcised QUEST IV. Whether Simeon and Levi their cruell act may be in part or in whole excused Vers. 25. ANd the third day when they were sore two of Iacobs sonnes Simeon and Levi. 1. Some Hebrewes excuse Simeon and Levi their fact because Hemor and Sichem first went about to breake the covenant thinking to spoile them of that they had for thus they say Shall not their flocks and substance be ours vers 23. Contra. 1. But it appeareth not that Hemor and Sichem went about any such thing they thus speake either to perswade the people who most respect their profit Mercer or they meane that by trading or having entercourse with them they should in a manner possesse their goods Perer. 2. But if it were so onely Hemor and Sichem had beene guilty of the violating of this league there was no cause to punish the whole Citie 3. And although they had reason to revenge themselves yet such a cruell massacre cannot be justified 2. Ramban excuseth this fact thinking that by the decrees of Noah if the Magistrates punished not adultery others might but who seeth not what confusion and disorder this doctrine would bring in â— that every private man should take upon him to bee a punisher of sinne The Apostle saith that the power or magistrate beareth not the sword for nought Rom. 13.4 It is peculiar then to him to exercise the sword 3. Philo allegorizeth this story by Dinah which signifieth judgement understanding the soule by Sichem the sonne of Hemor which is interpreted an Asse the brutish affections from the which Simeon and Levi the sonnes of prudence deliver the soule Lib. de migration Abrah But these allegories being devised onely and not warranted by Scripture cannot give any defence to such rage and violence 4. Some doe but in part excuse Simeon and Levi which may be considered on Gods behalfe and so the punishment was just or on the behalfe of the Sichemites who also for consenting unto that grievous sinne were justly also punished but on the behalfe of Simeon and Levi because they did it craftily this judgement was unjust sic Carthusian in libr. Iudith But this allegation maketh nothing for the justifying of Simeon and Levi their enterprise for God knoweth how to turne mens wicked acts to his glory neither did these furious men aime at any such end but sought to satisfie their revengefull minde 5. Some goe yet further that this act was not unjust quoad rem in respect of the thing because the Sichemites had grievously sinned but quoad modum they did it fraudulently Cajetan others say primum motum that the first motion to commit this slaughter was of God but they in the execution did modum excedere exceed measure Thom. Anglic. Cont. But Iacob condemneth not onely the execution but the very first device and counsell Into their secret let not my soule come Gen. 49.6 therefore the very first thought and device was evill and therefore not of God 6. Some proceed yet further and altogether defend both their fact and the manner thereof calling their craft and dissimulation a prudent caution their reasons are these 1. Because all the Sichemites were consenting unto that wickednesse and therefore they deserved punishment Cont. 1. It cannot bee gathered that all the Sichemites were consenting to the sinne of Sichem their fault was because of a carnall minde for their owne profit they received circumcision 2. And though the whole City had herein offended yet Simeon and Levi had no such calling or commission to put them to the sword 2. The place is objected Iudith 9.2 where the Lord is said to have given unto Simeon a sword to take vengeance upon the strangers that opened the wombe of the virgin and vers 4. Which were moved with thy zeale Contra. Though Simeon and Levi were ministers of Gods justice upon the Sichemites for their sinne yet they did it not without sinne and therefore against this booke which is no Scripture where their zeale is commended I oppose the sentence and censure of Iacob who saith That they did it in their selfe-will therefore not by the motion of Gods spirit and Cursed be their wrath Gen. 49.7 but if they had done it in zeale they were rather to be blessed 3. They further reason thus that if Simeon and Levi had committed such an unlawfull act Iacob would have more sharply reproved them Contra. Iacob partly considered the justice of God upon the Sichemites for the outrage committed against Dinah partly hee was moved with her complaint and moane for the losse of her virginity partly he gave place for the time to the rage of his sonnes that were in their fury and this was the cause of so easie a reprehension Mercer 4. But we reade of no restitution which Iacob caused to be made of the goods of the Sichemites taken away which Iacob would have done if the act had beene unlawfull for he saith He got it from the Amorite that is the fields and possessions of the Sichemites by his sword and bow Gen. 48.12 Contra. 1. It is not unlike but that many of the persons as the women and children taken captive were returned for they could not all remaine in Iacobs house and together with them much of the goods 2. The rest together with the ground though first unjustly had it pleased God should remaine unto Iacob as a recompence for the injurie done to his daughter as the Hebrewes tooke of the Egyptians jewels of silver and of gold without any restitution thereof in respect of their long and hard service yet neither this fact of theirs nor the other of Iacobs is here to be imitated Mercer 3. Iacob is said to get it with his sword not as though he joyned with his sonnes in the action or after consented unto it but because he by force and armes was ready to defend the possession of that ground from the invasion of the Canaanites whom God did strike with a feare they attempted nothing against Iacob or his sonnes Gen. 35.5 Mercer 5. Wherefore the best solution of this question is that although Simeon and Levi were ministers of Gods justice secretly working yet both the act and the manner thereof in respect of the instruments and executioners was unlawfull 1. Because they attempted this thing without the counsell or knowledge of Iacob whom this wrong most concerned in the ravishing of his daughter for Iacob saith Into their secret my soule enter not Gen. 49.7 2. They dissembled propounding a condition as though they would enter into a league with them and yet meant it not 3. They make religion a cloake of their cruelty and abuse circumcision to that end the ordinance of God yet Ioseph somewhat to hide the nakednesse of the fathers of that Nation in his narration omitteth to make mention of this craft 4. They put the whole Citie to the sword even
who tooke him to be a Magician after the manner of Egypt Mercer QUEST II. Why the searcher taketh no exception to the money found in their sacks mouth but onely to the cup. Vers. 12. ANd he searched and the cup was found in Benjamins sacke c. 1. He cunningly searcheth all their sacks though he knew well enough where to finde the cup that it might bee done without suspition Muscul. 2. Whereas the money was in every one of their sacks mouth which hee that searched found no fault with but onely for the cup it was not for that as Ramban thinketh the money was put there with their privity for the cup was conveyed into Benjamins sacke together with the money 3. But he passeth over the money with silence because he had told them before Genes 43.23 that God gave them their treasure and so he might say now againe Muscul. and if he had taken exception to the money they should all have beene stayed whereas Iosephs purpose onely was to have Benjamin apprehended for the triall of his brethrens affection toward him Mercer QUEST III. Why Iudah speaketh for the rest Vers. 16. THen said Iudah c. the Lord hath found out the iniquity c. 1. Iudah speaketh first and for the rest not because he had now the principality above his brethren as Calvin for that yet was not declared but because he was surety to Iacob for Benjamins returne and so this matter concerned him most Mercer 2. And this iniquity which God found out is not to be referred with Vatablus to this present accusation of theft whereof they were not guiltie but to their former trespasse committed toward Ioseph as they before confessed that trouble was befallen them for that cause Genes 42.21 Iunius Mercer QUEST IV. Why Iudah saith to Ioseph thou art aâ— Pharaoh Vers. 18. THou art even as Pharaoh 1. Iudah maketh mention of his great authority both to shew the reason of his former speech Let not thy wrath be kindled against thy servant he had reason to feare his displeasure being so great a person Iunius as also to shew that he was not ignorant of his greatnesse and therefore pressed to speake unto him not of any rude boldnesse but of necessity Calvin Likewise he doth by this meanes insinuate himselfe for great persons love to heare of their honour and authority Mercer 2. And now beginneth more lively to take effect that propheticall dreame of Ioseph that his brethren should bow downe to him as their King for so they objected to Ioseph Shalt thou reigne or bee a King over us Gen. 37.8 Muscul. QUEST V. How some things are omitted by Moses afterward expressed Vers. 19. HAve ye a father or a brother 1. This question asked by Ioseph is not set downe by Moses before in the story Gen. 42. in their first examination yet there is no doubt but that Ioseph so inquired of them for Iudah would not tell an untruth in his presence but Moses supplieth that here which was omitted before 2. Benjamin is called a little lad or youth jeled cathan in respect of the rest for otherwise he was now supposed to be thirtie yeares of age having ten children which went downe with him into Egypt Gen. 47. some thinke he was but 24. or 25. yeares old but that number of children will give him to be elder Mercer QUEST VI. Why Benjamin could not depart farre from his father Vers. 22. THe childe cannot depart from his father 1. This is neither a doubtfull speech whether to bee referred to Iacob or Benjamin as Aben Ezra as hee noteth that to bee of the same kinde Ruth 4.8 He drew off his shooe whether it be understood of the buyer or seller 2. Neither is it meant of Benjamin that he could not depart from his father without danger to himselfe as Ramban 3. But it is spoken in respect of Iacob whose love was such to Benjamin that he could not endure that he should goe from him and therefore Iudah saith that Iacobs life depended of his life vers 30. 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. Nothing is hid from Gods sight Vers. 16. THe Lord hath found out our wickednesse c. God then seeth all things he knoweth what is done in secret neither the darknesse of the night neither the secrecie of the place can hide from his sight and knowledge so the Apostle saith All things are naked and open in his eyes with whom we have to doe Heb. 4.13 2. Doct. Servitude and want of liberty the punishment of theft Vers. 16. BEhold we are servants to my Lord both we and he with whom the cup is found They judge themselves worthy of servitude and bondage because of this supposed theft of the cup It is therefore a just punishment that they which doe steale away the goods of others should lose the liberty and free use of their owne Muscul. Answerable hereunto is that law which was afterward made by Moses that if the theefe had not wherewithall to make restitution hee should be sold for his theft Exod. 22.4 5. Places of Confutation 1. Confut. Against the vulgar Latine translation Vers. 28. ANd I said of a surety he is torne in peeces But the vulgar Latine translation readeth and yeâ— said whereas the truth is that Iosephs brethren did not so say to their father but onely shewed him Iacobs coat embrued with bloud but Iacob upon the sight thereof so gathered and said Ioseph surely is torne in peeces Gen. 37.33 2. Confut. Against Bellarmine that taketh faith for a vow Vers. 32. THe Latine translation readeth Ego hunc in fidem meam recepi I gave my faith or became surety for him from this place Bellarmine would justifie his exposition of that place 1 Tim. 5.12 Having damnation because they have broken the first faith which he would have understood of the vow of continencie as in this place Iudah by his faith meaneth the solemne promise made to his father But Bellarmine falleth in this collection for in the originall there is no word that signifieth faith the word here used is guarabh which is to be surety or undertake for another 6. Places of Morall use 1. Morall To use honour and wealth moderately Vers. 2. PVt my silver cup c. Ioseph might have used cups of gold and precious stone if hee would his honour riches and abundance was so great but he contenteth himselfe to drinke in silver and carrieth himselfe moderately in his great honour Calvin whereby men are taught in the middest of their prosperity to be humble and not to be proud of their riches as it is in the Psalme If riches increase set not your heart upon them Psal. 62.10 2. Morall That we should looke unto God in all our affliction Vers. 16. GOd hath found out the wickednesse c. Those men doe wisely acknowledge God to be the authour of their trouble and affliction and their sinne to have justly procured it Vatablus So should we in
bought for so little Calvin 4. Neither was this portion a severall lot to Ioseph beside the portion that afterwards fell unto Ephraim and Manasseh in the division of the land for they had it in their lot Iosu. 24.32 Mercer 5. Wherefore this portion given to Ioseph was both the citie Sechem and territorie adjoyning whereof mention is made Iohn 4.5 For though Sechem bee not here a proper name as the Septuag read because of the word achad one that is joyned with it for there was but one Sechem yet in this word which signifieth a part or portion there is a fit allusion also to the place it selfe which Iacob giveth Iun. QUEST IX How Iacob is said to have gotten Sechem by his sword and bow Vers. 22. WHich I gat out of the hand of the Amorite by my sword and bow 1. Neither is this understood of the violent taking of the citie by the sword of Simeon and Levi which Iacob should count his act because his familie assisted them and for his cause God spared them Euseb. Chrysostome for Iacob afterward accursed them for this cruell act and professed that hee no waies consented to it into their secret let not my soule come Gen. 49.6 2. Nor yet by the sword and bow Iacobs innocencie and justice is understood whereby hee was delivered Hierom. or his Praiers as the Chalde for we need not flie unto metaphors and figures where the historicall and literall sense may serve 4. It is also a coact and forced interpretarion that Iacob got it by his sword that is by his money which he had by his labour gathered Hierom. 5. And to applie it by the figure prolepsis to the time following when the Israelites expelled the Canaanites by force as Iunius doth is not so sin for this had beene no gift at all and beside Iacob had alreadie possession of Sechem in Canaan and so might dispose of it 6. Neither because it fell to the lot and share of Ephraim and Manasses is it said to be given to Ioseph but Ioseph had a peculiar right in it and therefore was buried there 7. Some by the sword and bow expound the favour and grace which Iacob found with Hemor to buy the ground for so little money but force and favour are two contrarie things 8. Some thinke that Iacob used some ceremonie by the casting of an arrow and holding out a sword as Ioas did in the presence of Elisha 2 King 9. so giving Ioseph possession of that countrie But Iacob speaketh of the time past which I have gotten not any thing done then presently 9. Some thinke that Iacob did indeed some such exploit by force of armes against the Amorites as Abraham did against the foure kings Genes 14. though it be not expressed Cajetane Andre Masius but where the scripture sufficeth we need not devise unwritten stories 10. Wherefore I expound this place by that Gen. 35. vers 5. where after that the Sichemites were destroyed and Iacob at Gods appointment removed to Bethel God sent a feare upon the cities round about that they durst not encounter with Iacob and his familie who as is most like stood upon their guard and armed themselves ready to have resisted their enemies if they had assaulted them And by this meanes because Iacob held the possession of Sechem as it were by warlike policie the Lord causing the Canaanites to feare his force and valour he is said to have gotten it by his sword and bow Lyran. following R. Salomon Mercer This I take to be the most proper exposition QUEST X. How Iacob is said to have gotten Sechem out of the hand of the Amorites Vers. 22. WHich I gat out of the hand of the Amorite whereas Hemor the Lord of Sichem was an Hivite Genes 34.2 the question is how Iacob is said to have gotten Sechem out of the hand of the Amorite for the satisfaction whereof 1. Neither was Sechem the sonne of Hemor called an Amorite of his father for Hemor beginneth with the Hebrew letter cheth Amorite with alepâ— 2. Neither need we suppose that Iacob after he had bought a peece of ground of Hemor did afterward inlarge it by expelling the Amorites as Masius there being no such expressed in the story 3. Neither yet with Pererius are we forced to say that all the Canaanites were called Amorites 4. But it is most like that the Hivites and Amorites were mixed together and that the denomination is taken from the Amorite as the more valiant people Mercer this also confirmeth ouâ— former exposition that Iacob iâ— saying which I gat by my sword and bow out of the hand of the Amorite meaneth noâ— the surprising of the Sichemites by Simeon and Levi for they were Hivites not Amorites but rather the keeping of that possession afterwards from the Amorites which inhabited other cities adjoyning who would have invaded Iacob but that the feare of God came upon them that they durst attempt nothing against Iacobs sons whom they held to be men of valour 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. Ministers have no power in themselves to blesse but onely in Gods name Vers. 16. THe Angel blessed the children Iacob taketh not upon him to blesse in his owne name but as a Minister onely and pronouncer of the blessing desireth God to blesse the children Ministers then have no power actually in themselves to blesse or curse but onely as instruments and messengers they pronounce the sentence of blessing or cursing in the name of God so that as the Apostle saith he that planteth is nothing nor he that watereth but God that giveth the increase 1 Cor. 3.7 Calvin 2. Doct. God bestoweth his gifts freely without respect to our worthinesse Vers. 19. HIs younger brother shall be greater than he Ephraim is preferred before his elder brother Manasseh and therefore his tribe beareth the name of his father Ioseph Apocalyp 7.8 whereas Manassehs tribe is rehearsed under his owne name so was Abel preferred before Cain Isaack before Ismael Iacob before Esau this was not for any worthinesse in Ephraim more than in Manasseh for wicked Ieroboam that caused Israel to sinne came of Ephraim but that we should know that all is of Gods grace without any respect unto mens worke as the Scripture saith I will have mercy on him to whom I will shew mercy Rom. 9.15 5. Places of Confutation 1. Confut. Against the vulgar Latine translation Vers. 12. IOseph did reverence downe to the ground If Ioseph did shew such great reverence to his father bowing himselfe downe to the ground it is not like that Iacob adored or worshipped the rod and scepter of Ioseph thereby giving honour to his sonne as the blinde Latine translation readeth Hebr. 11.21 see before Chap. 47. confut 1. 2. Confut. Against the superstitious use of the signe of the crosse Vers. 14. DIrecting his hands of purpose c. Hence Perer. noteth that Iacob of purpose layed his hands acrosse to prefigure the mystery of the crosse whereby the
Ionathan to David and David to him all these when they tooke these oathes did sweare privately and as private men Simler 2. And seeing an oath serveth for the evidence of the truth and for the ending of strife and controversies in this behalfe there may bee as lawfull and as necessary an use of an oath privately as publikely not upon every occasion but when the matter is urgent and the case so requireth Vrsin 4. Morall observations upon the third Commandement 1. Observ. Against common and rash swearing THou shalt not take c. Here that common and notorious abuse of rash swearing in common and ordinary talke is reproved when the name of God is taken up prophanely and scoffingly without any kinde of reverence at all Chrysostome in his time finding fault with this abuse thus writeth Among the Iewes the name of God was so reverenced that being written in plates it was lawfull for none to carry it but for the high Priest but now Velut quiddam vulgare sic ipsius nomen circumfecimus We beare about every where the name of God as a common thing Chrysost. ad popul Antioch homil 26. Theodoret useth this fit resemblance Si vestem paulò pretiosiorem in dies festos multi adservare consuerunt c. If many use to keepe their better garment for holy dayes how much more should the name of God bee consecrated unto prayer and other holy exercises Ex Lippom. It was an use among the Heathen to keepe secret such names as they would have had in reverence there was a certaine hid and secret name of the City of Rome which is not now knowne which they say by the decree of the Gods was kept secret and one Marenus Soranus for naming the same but once in publike was adjudged to death Solinus in polyhistor cap. 1. de Roma The name also Demogorgon which the Gentiles held to bee the first God was not to bee uttered they thought when he was named the earth would tremble and Lucanus lib. 6. de bell civil writeth how Eritâ— the Sorceresse would thus adjure the Furies that if they did not consent shee would name Demogorgon Tostat. qu. 3. If the Gentiles were thus curious in not prophaning the names of their Idols it teacheth Christians that it is a shame for them so irreverently to use the name of the great God of heaven and earth whom they doe not only name but sweare by without any feare or reverence 2. Observ. Of the fearefull judgement of God threatning against blasphemers THe Lord will not hold him guiltlesse Though blasphemers and common swearers may escape the consure of men yet the Lord will not surely suffer them to goe unpunished If railers upon men are excluded the kingdome of God 1. Cor. 6.10 much more they which blaspheme the name of the living God If Gods hand should not be upon them here yet in the next world they are to expect nothing but everlasting horror unlesse they doe repent These that make a jest of religion and doe scoffe at the name of God are those abominable persons spoken of Revel 21.8 which shall have their part in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone Cajetane here noteth well Quoniam futurum hoc judicium divinum raro impletum videmus in hac vita c. Because wee see this divine judgement seldome to be fulfilled in this life it followeth that it is to be referred to the judgement following after this life Therefore let men stand in awe of this fearefull judgement that is threatned against all prophane swearers and blasphemers 3. Observ. Against breakers of their oath and perjured persons FUrther as rash swearing is condemned so it is a most horrible and fearefull sinne for one to take a false oath and not to doe and performe as he hath sworne a righteous man and such an one as shall dwell in Gods Tabernacle is described that hee sweareth to his owne hinderance and changeth not Psal. 15.4 All such therefore are condemned which make shipwracke of a good conscience herein Such are our knights of the post that will be hired to take false oathes like unto the Turkish Sâ—iâ—i and Chagi who for a Ducket will take a thousand false oathes Oleaster useth this comparison If a man had given in pawne his sonne or any other precious thing for the performing of his oath he would labour by all meanes to redeeme it how much more when men have as it were pawned the name of their God Upon the fourth Commandement 1. Questions discussed QUEST I. Of the order of the fourth Commandement why it is put after the other 8. REmember the Sabbath day c. 1. Remotis impedimentis vèra religionis c. The impediments of religion being removed in the former Commandements as idolatry and prophanenesse or irreverence of the name of God this precept followeth Per quod homines in vera religione fundarâ—â—tur By which men should be grounded in true religion Thom. 2.2 quaest 122. art 4. in Cor. Prius enim sunt removenda impedimenta alicujus rei instituendae c. For first the impediments of a thing to be instituted must be removed before the thing can be instituted Lyran. 2. And this is the cause as Cyril noteth why the other Commandements before going are propounded negatively but this affirmatively Quia ad actâ—m statim eos impellâ—â— Because he presently draweth them here unto the act and execution Cyril lib. 4. in Ioah cap. 51. In the other Commandements first they are commanded to take away the impediments before the precept could be acted QUEST II. Why it is said only in this Commandement Remember c. 3. IN the other Commandements they were taught Deum primò venerari corde deinde ore First to worship God in heart then in mouth now it followeth here that we should worship him opere indeed Thom. Remember 1. Whereas Deut. 5. Moses rehearseth this Commandement thus Keepe the Sabbath day that thou sanctifie it but here he saith Remember the Sabbath day R. Salomon hath this conceit that both of these sentences were pronounced at once by a double sound of the trumpe which sounded forth the Commandements which is a fansie without any ground there Moses as the lawgiver doth not tie himselfe to the very same words keeping the sense Ex Tostat. 2. This memento remember some thinke is not referred to the Sabbath day but to the reason of the institution of the Sabbath taken from the creation this law therefore sendeth us backe to call to minde the creation of the world and how the Lord rested upon the seventh day after that in six dayes he had finished all the workes of the creation Tostat. So also Thomas Ponitur ut rememorationum beneficii praeteriti It is put as a remembrance of a benefit past But the connexion of the words sheweth that Remember is to be referred to the Sabbath day it selfe 3. Some will have this Remember to bee applied to the things to come
Wise-man saith Say not thou I will recompence evill but wait upon the Lord and he shall save thee Prov. 20.12 3. Observ. Surfetting by eâ—cesse forbidden FUrther by this precept they are condemned qui luxu se occidunt c. which kill themselves with surfetting and drunkennesse riot and excesse Basting whereupon often ensueth also quarrelling and wounds as the Wise-man sheweth To whom is woe to whom is strife c. to whom are wounds without cause to whom is rednesse of the eyes to them that tarrie long at wine Prov. 23.29 30. The seventh Commandement 1. Questions discussed QUEST I. Of the order and negative propounding of this Commandement THou shalt not commit adulterie 1. This Commandement very fitly followeth after the other Thou shalt not kill Quia post injuriam quae infertur personae nulla est major quà m illa quae infertur conjunctae Because next after the injurie done to the person there is none greater than that which is offred unto the joynt person for they two shall be one flesh Thom. in opuscul So also Lyranus 2. This Commandement is propounded negatively rather than affirmatively because the negative is more generall than the affirmative Tum quoad tempâ—ra quà m personas both in respect of the time and persons for at all times and in all places it is unlawfull to kill to commit adulterie c. but at all times and in all places wee must not honour our parents and for the persons wee must not offer violence or wrong unto any but for the affirmative it is impossible to doe good to all Thom. in Epist. ad Roman cap. 13. See before quest 1. upon the sixth Commandement QUEST II. Whether the uncleane desire of the heart be forbidden in this precept IN this Commandement not onely the impuritie of the bodie but of the soule also is forbidden and chastitie commanded in both Gregories opinion is that God Per hoc praeceptum non peccata cogitationis sed operis resecuit c. Doth not by this precept cut off the sinfull thoughts but the sinfull act and that Christ afterward in the law Cogitationes hominum religavit Did bind also the thoughts of men In Ezech. homil 13. Augustine also is of opinion that in this precept Ipsum opus notatum est The worke of uncleannesse it selfe is noted but in the other Thou shalt not covet Ipsa concupiscentia the very concupiscence because saith he sometimes it may fall out that a man may commit adulterie cùm non concupiscat illam when he doth not covet her but upon some other cause doth companie with her Aliquando eam concupiscat nec ei misceatur poenam timens Sometime he may covet her and not company with her fearing the punishment in quaest 71. in Exod. Contra. 1. Our Saviour Christ doth not adde any thing to the law of Moses or bringeth in any new interpretation but doth free and cleare the law from the grosse and corrupt gloses of the Scribes and Pharisies delivering the true sense and meaning thereof as it was first given unto the people And therefore Chrysostome well saith Vt per concordiam mandatorum ipse inveniatúr author legis fuisse gratia That by the agreement of the Commandements in the old and new Testament the same may be found to bee the author of the law and of grace in Matth. hom 11. And that even the inward concupiscence and desire was forbidden in the old Testament it is evident by Iobs practice in whose heart the morall law was written I have made a covenant with mine eyes why then should I thinke on a maid chap. 31.1 2. Concerning Augustines opinion the concupiscence which is joyned with a full purpose onely wanting opportunitie and being restrained by feare from the externall act is a breach of this Commandement and not of the last as our blessed Saviour expoundeth Matth. 5.28 What kinde of concupiscence is prohibited in the last precept and how it differeth herein ftom this shall bee shewed afterward when wee come to that place 2. And that commixtion which hath no concupiscence nor consent of will being violent and forced as in them which are ravished it is no adulterie at all which alwayes proceedeth out of the heart 3. But that the inward sanctimonie and puritie of the minde is here commanded and the contrarie forbidden it is thus proved 1. By the definition of puritie and chastitie which is to be holy both in bodie and spirit as S. Paul describeth a true Virgin 1 Cor. 7.34 So the same Apostle 1 Thess. 5.23 That your whole spirit soule and bodie may be kept blamelesse unto the comming of our Lord Iesus Christ. 2. Both the soules and bodies of the faithfull are the Temples of the Spirit and therefore ought to be kept holy 1 Cor. 3.16 Know yee not that yee are the Temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you if any destroy the Temple of God him shall God destroy Basting 3. Chrysostome urgeth these foure reasons first from the interpretation of our blessed Saviour who sheweth that this Commandement is broken in the very inward lust and concupiscence Matth. 5.28 4. Secondly from the analogie and correspondencie which it hath with other Commandements that Irasci proximis sine causa to be angrie with our neighbours without cause is a breach of the precedent Commandement Thou shalt not kill So Concupiscere mulierem alienam c. to desire a strange woman though the act of concupiscence follow not is against this precept 5. Thirdly in respect of God Qui non tantum opus hominis aspicit quantum cor Who doth not so much looke unto the worke of man as to his heart 6. Fourthly because concupiscence is the cause of adulterie Omne adulterium ex concupiscentia All adulterie proceedeth from concupiscence as our blessed Saviour sheweth Mark 7.21 Even from the heart of man proceed evill thoughts adulteries fornications c. Quomodo ergo tolletur adulterium nisi pracisa fuerit concupiscentia c. How then shall adulterie be taken away unlesse concupiscence be first cut off Homil. 12. in Matth. Seeing then that the effect that is adultery and outward uncleannesse is forbidden in this precept it followeth also that the very cause thereof which is concupiscence should be restrained QUEST III. Other acts of uncleannesse beside adulterie here forbidden COncerning the externall act of uncleannesse which is in the very letter of this precept prohibited the Hebrewes are of opinion that onely concubitus adulterinus the adulterous act is here forbidden But this opinion is easily convinced 1. Tostatus urgeth this reason Qui prohibet minus malum à fortiori prohibet majus c. He that forbiddeth the lesse evill doth much more prohibit the greater evill for there are more unlawfull acts of uncleannesse than adulterie as those unnaturall sinnes committed either with another kinde as with brute beasts which is monstrous or with the same kinde and with the same sex as
Analys But I rather subscribe to Vrsinus that thinketh originall sinne to be a breach of this precept as originall justice is therein prescribed and commanded because the Morall law is grounded upon the Law of nature which was perfect in man by creation before his fall from which perfection originall sinne is a declining defect This then is the conclusion that these involuntary motions though they doe not venire in rationem coram Deo come into reckoning before God if they presently vanish before the will and affection incline unto them yet they doe shew the corruption of our nature that although they breake not out into a flame yet they are sparkles that flie upward Iob 5.7 our corrupt nature is as the coale and those idle and wandering thoughts as the sparks that flie up but if these sparks doe not kindle into a flame they shall never burne us nor be laid unto our judgement and so Chrysostom sath well Si concupiscentia non consentit voluntas sola concupiscentia non damnat If the will consent not to concupiscence concupiscence alone shall not condemne us Homil. 52. in Matth. which is through Gods mercie for otherwise even originall corruption is sufficient to condemne us QUEST IV. Why there is no precept to direct tha inward passion of anger as of coveting NOw why there is not the like precept given to direct the inward act of the irefull power of the mind as to forbid the first motion of anger and rage as there is virtutis concupiscibilis of the coveting and desiring facultie these reasons are alleaged 1. The like is to be understood in other Commandements that the very internall act and first inclination of the heart unto evill is forbidden but expresly the concupiscence is named because it is more hard to resist the concupiscence whose object is some apparent good either delectable or profitable whereas the inward passion of anger movet ad aliquid triste moveth alwayes to some heavie thing not delightsome or profitable So Tostatus The same reason is yeelded by Thomas Aquin Homicidium secundùm se non est concupiscibile sed magis horribile c. Murther is not of it selfe a thing to be desired but to be abhorred but adulterie Habet rationem alicujus boni scilicet delectabilis furtum boni scilicet utilis Hath respect unto some thing that seemeth good namely delectable good and theft to profitable good therefore the concupiscence of these required a speciall precept rather than the other c. But this is no sufficient reason for both it is as hard to resist anger as any other passion because of all other it is most violent and sudden and beside the angrie man in purposing to doe mischiefe taketh delight therein and thinketh it good for him so to doe so that this passion also hath an object of some thing seeming good for otherwise the will of man naturally is not carried unto that which is taken to be evill 2. In this precept even that concupiscence is forbidden which is involuntarie and hath not the assent of the will for as Chrysostom saith Concupiscimus frequenter etiam quod nolumus We covet often that which wee will not All other voluntarie inclinations of the minde to adulterie or theft are prohibited in those other precepts but there is no anger without a purpose of revenge and so hath a consent of the will and so there need no speciall precept for that it properly belonging to that precept Thou shalt not kill as our blessed Saviour sheweth Matth. 5.22 To this purpose Tostatus saith well Ira audit rationem syllogizantem c. Anger heareth reason disputing whether it be meet to take revenge and before reason hath thus concluded anger riseth not but anger hearing this first conclusion that it is fit to take revenge staieth not to heare the second whom and how wee are to revenge but as a quicke messenger that goeth away before hee hath halfe his arrand and as angrie dogges that when they see one doe straightwayes imagine that it is their part to barke not considering who it is that they barke at whether their master or no so anger being an hot and hastie passion resolving by reason of the thing yet weigheth not every circumstance Now concupiscence when any object is offered heareth no reason at all but presently falleth to coveting of it Ex Tostat. qu. 27. QUEST V. Whether sinne properly consist in the internall or externall act IT is here the opinion of the Hebrewes that if a man onely desire another mans wife in his heart and goe no further he sinneth not and Iosephus lib. 12. Antiquit. reproveth Polybius the Historiographer for saying that Antiochus died miserably because he would have spoyled the Temple adding further Si solùm cogitavit non egit peccatum That if he onely thought to doe so he sinned not therefore he was not punished for that but for other evils which he had done in Jerusalem Ex Lyran. Contra. But it may bee made manifest by divers reasons that sinne consisteth rather in actu interiori quà m exteriori In the internall rather than externall act 1. That maketh a good or evill act which is in a mans power but the externall act is not often in mans power but the internall is as the act of the understanding and will as the Apostle saith Rom. 7.18 To will is present with me but I finde no meanes to performe that which is good c. 2. Onely it is proper unto man beyond beasts to doe a good or evill act but the externall act bruit beasts can doe as well as man therefore it is the internall facultie of the understanding and will that maketh the act good or bad 3. If in the externall act good and evill onely were found then Angels should doe neither good nor bad which have no externall act because they have no externall faculties powers or instruments the will therefore and understanding which onely are in Spirits are the causes of good and bad actions 4. The same externall acts may bee done as well by those that sleepe by fooles and mad men as by the waking by wise and sober men but the externall act in those is not sinne because it proceedeth not from the will and understanding 5. Both divine and humane lawes make a difference betweene voluntarie and involuntarie acts as in wilfull and casuall murther but the externall act in both is all one 6. Therefore Actus exterior secundùm se nec bonus nec malus est The externall act of it selfe is neither good nor evill but yet in men because of the connexion which the externall act hath with the internall there is some goodnesse or evilnesse found though not so properly as in the internall for there are two acts of the will and understanding the immediate act as to understand to will which is called actâ—â— elicitus the act which issueth out and there is a mediate act as to kill to commit adultery
which is intended for the good of the Citie yet some may be dispensed withall and exempted from watching who may more necessarily bee employed for the common good for here although the letter of the law bee not precisely kept yet the intention of the Law-maker is observed which is to seeke and procure the common good So likewise 1. Universally the Lord himselfe neither will nor can dispense against his law as to make it lawfull to have other gods to take Gods name in vaine and such like for this were for God to denie himselfe to be just which were to deny himselfe but the Apostle saith God is faithfull and cannot denie himselfe 2 Tim 2.13 but to make it lawfull in generall to violate the precepts of the first and second Table were to denie his owne justice and so consequently to denie himselfe for God is most just yea justice it selfe and the law is a perfect rule of justice 2. Yet in the particular determinations of the law the Lord doth dispense as with Abrahams sacrificing of his sonne the Israelites robbing of the Egyptians the fornication of Ose the Prophet for the will of God which is most just and the right which he hath in the lives bodies and goods of men maketh these things lawfull being done by the Commandement of God which otherwise should bee unlawfull for as a man may use his Oxe or his Asse at his pleasure because they are ordained to his use so the Lord may doe with men take away their lives at his pleasure and that by a double right both because man by his sinne hath deserved to die and God as Creator may use the creature as it may best serve to his glorie And as a man may use his owne goods and that which is lent unto a man precariâ— freely and frankly during the pleasure of the lender he may when he will require againe so the earth being the Lords and the fulnesse thereof which he as it were lendeth unto man so long as it pleaseth him the Lord may justly at his pleasure transferre things from one to another So likewise in the third case of fornication like as matrimony maketh carnall copulation lawfull so the Lord may tale vinculum inducere by his commandement bring in and supplie the like bond as matrimonie is as when he commanded the Prophet to take him a wife of fornications Hose 1.3 the commandement of God made that lawfull which otherwise was unlawfull 3. But as God can make that which seemeth unjust to be lawfull and just so yet can he not make a just and good act to be evill and wicked as that he which worshippeth God aright doth evill or such like and the reason is because God by this meanes should bee contrarie to himselfe in commanding one so to worship him and yet to count him so worshipping him to doe evill Againe Impossibile est Deum facere quae non potest velle It is impossible for God to doe that hee cannot will now the Lord willeth none evill to be done therefore hee cannot make that which is good to be evill because he cannot denie himselfe who is onely good 4. Further a difference is to be made betweene the precepts of the first and secood Table God doth dispense with the precepts of the second which are referred to the good of our neighbour when he seeth it more to make for his owne glorie which is the chiefe end and scope of the duties of the first and second Table as when God commandeth to dishonour parents rather than to dishonour him and biddeth any kill and so in the rest but with the precepts of the first Table God dispenseth not because they are immediately referred to Gods glory for that were to consent to the dishonouring of himselfe And thus much for the answer to the first part of the argument Secondly it followeth not if God can dispense that therefore the Prelates of the Church may 1. Because the dispensation against a law must bee by as great authoritie as the law was first made by but the morall law grounded upon the law of nature was founded by the Author and Creator of nature and therefore by him onely and not by any else may it be dispensed with 2. As in naturall effects ordinarily there must goe before a naturall cause as a thing cannot be made hot unlesse fire or some other efficient cause of heat be put unto it so that the Pope himselfe cannot command a thing to bee hot but by such efficient cause of heat yet the Lord without any such mediate or ordinarie cause can make a thing hot by his infinite power supplying that cause himselfe so likewise in spirituall actions the Lord may supplie that which maketh the thing lawfull which man cannot doe unlesse some externall cause or circumstance doe concurre which maketh the act lawfull As to kill is an unlawfull act in it selfe neither can the Pope or any other make it lawfull to kill unlesse there be some cause that maketh it lawfull to kill as when the partie commanded to be slaine hath deserved to die But God to whom all men are debters and who is the Lord of every mans life may command to kill without any injustice although there be no such apparent cause or circumstance which should make that act lawfull 2. Object Further it is objected thus to restore that which is committed to a mans trust is a naturall dutie yet this is dispensed with when as a man refuseth to restore to a mad man his sword or weapon which he gave one to keepe so the Magistrate ordinarily dispenseth with that precept Thou shalt not kill when he commandeth malefactors to be slaine so the Macchabees dispensed with the Sabbath when they resolved to fight with their enemies upon the Sabbath 1 Macchab. chap. 2. as these precepts are dispensed withall by men so also may the rest Answ. 1. For the first instance there is in that particular case no dispensation against the law of nature for then by such dispensation it should bee made lawfull not to restore that which is committed to trust which cannot bee made lawfull by any dispensation for this were to crosse and overthrow the law of nature but not to restore a sword to a furious man is but a particular interpretation of that generall law of nature wherein the intent of that law is kept for it is agreeable to the law of nature to render whatsoever belongeth to another and the reason thereof is because it is just so it is lawfull by the same law nothwithstanding not to give unto a mad man his owne sword because it is just also the meaning and reason of the law is kept because the furious man would doe some hurt with his weapon and therefore to minister occasion and instruments unto his rage were unjust 2. In the other two particulars there is no dispensation but an interpretation rather or declaration of the law in the
have their ministerie the more reverenced and had in reputation Marbach As Iosephus writeth how Alexander the Great when the high Priest met him adorned with his Priestly attire reverenced him and adored the great God of heaven in him whose Priest he was 3. Beside the comelinesse and outward glorie of the Priestly attire there was another cause of their institution specialiâ— actiâ— ipsarum vestâ—um the speciall action and use of those garments for some of them were for some speciall ministration and service as the breastplate which was set with twelve precious stones in remembrance of the twelve tribes of Israel Tostat. quaest 1. 4. Ornatus exterior veri spiritualis defectum notavit The outward adorning noted the defect of the true spirituall ornaments c. Calvin And hereby was signified the insufficiencie of Aarons Priesthood 5. And God by this glittering shew of the Priestly garments voluit plâ—â— quam Angelicum 〈…〉 splâ—ndorem ostendere would set forth the more than Angelicall brightnesse of all vertues which should shine in Christ. 6. And as those vertues served ad vitia â—egenda to cover the faulâ—s of the bodie so wee are thereby taught that we must come before God not cloathed withouâ— owne righteousnesse but apparelled with Christs robes which shall make us to appeare comely in the light of God Simler QUEST VI. Of the cunning men that wrought in the Tabernacle Vers. 3. THou shalt speake to all cunning men whom I have filled 1. Although there might be men of ordinarie skill in the host yet that had not beene sufficient for this extraordinarie worke Coâ—munis peritia non satisfecisset huic operi Common skill had not beene answerable to this worke Gallas and therefore the Lord infused into them a speciall gift of understanding and dexteritie to worke in all kinde of curious worke 2. And it is probable that these principall and chiefe workmen had not onely their skill and knowledge increased which they were indued with before but that the Lord did wholly and absolutely infuse into them the knowledge of these Arts as the text is that God had filled them with the Spirit of wisdome Oleaster Like as the twelve Apostles were men altogether unlearned whom God used in the spirituall building up of the Church as these were emploied in the materiall Tabernacle 3. These were not onely endued with an understanding heart to invent curious works and give direction to others but their hands and other parts of their bodie were fitted accordingly for the execution and practice and finishing of these works And chap 31.4 it is said they were filled with wisdome c. to finde our curious works to worke in gold and silver c. They did not onely invent and finde them out but did also helpe to worke themselves Tostat. qu. 4. 4. It may be that such like works quotidie nunc fiunt c. are now made in many places but then in that simple age and rude time such things having not beene seene before these curious works seemed strange and admirable Tostat. qu. 2. QUEST VII Whether this gift of cunning and wisdome remained in the workmen after the Tabernacle was finished TOstatus here putteth forth a question whether after that the Tabernacle and the worke thereof was finished these cunning men still retained this gift of understanding in Sciences and Arts. 1. The negative part may bee thus proved that their knowledge and skill then ceased because there was no more use thereof after they had finished that worke for the which it was given them As also like as the gift of prophecie alwaies continued not with the Prophets but during that time onely wherein they prophesied 2. But Tostatus here answereth that though the worke were ended for the which the cunning men were indued with such wisdome yet it was not necessarie that the gift should be taken from them though the act were discontinued and againe there is difference betweene an habit of the minde and an act onely of the minde The Prophets had not a Propheticall habit infused but onely an actuall illumination was sent upon them while they prophesied and that illumination being intermitted they left prophesying and therefore he concludeth Deum non abstulisse habitus iâ—fusos That God did not take away from them the habits of these Arts and Sciences infused after the Tabernacle was finished quast 3. 3. But the more probable opinion is that this gift was neither altogether lost which they had received neither yet did it wholly remaine for these workmen were indued with a double facultie one was in the illumination of their minde to invent how to fashion the worke according to Moses direction and that platforme which was shewed in the mount the other was a dexteritie and agilitie in their hand to worke that which they had devised and invented The first of these being a propheticall gift and proceeding of a speciall instinct to invent and find out worke answerable to the patterne ceased and was intermitted in them after the Tabernacle was finished for it was an act rather of the minde than an habit neither was there any cause why that inward instinct should continue the end being atchieved wherefore it was first infused But the other facultie in their handiworke which was increased by their practice and experience and was confirmed by use and custome could not be so soone forgotten and laid aside it is not unlike but that the same remained still which they might have put in practice in other works and buildings if there had beene occasion offered QUEST VIII Of the number of the Priestly garments and ornaments Vers. 4. NOw these shall be the garments 1. Beda is of opinion that there were but eight kinde of garments in all which the high Priest was apparelled with namely these 1. The breast-plate or pectorall for the breast 2. The Ephod for the shoulders 3. The robe 4 And coat for the whole bodie 5. The Miter for the head 6. And the girdle for the waste 7. The linen breeches to cover the secret parts 8. And the plate of gold for the Miter whereof three the linen breeches the linen coat and the girdle were common to the inferiour Priests But Beda is greatly deceived and in these three points 1. The coat here named called cetoneth tashebets the embroidered coat was not common unto the inferiour Priests but peculiar to the high Priest vers 39. Moses is bid to make Aarons sonnes coats also cetâ—neth but they were not embroidered vers 40. 2. The high Priest also had a kinde of girdle proper to himselfe which was made of needle worke vers 39. and the inferiour Priests also had other girdles beside vers 40. 3. The other Priests also had bonnets which were of a divers fashion from the Miter which was made for the high Priest vers 40. 2. R. Salomon maketh but nine parcels of the Priestly attire and Ribera likewise namely foure which were common to all the Priests