among souldiers and robbing by the high way where ones life is put in danger All these kindes being more than simple thefts may receive the sentence of death by Moses Law and Magistrates herein may with a good conscience execute the rigour of the Law upon such violent outragious impudent wanton and incorrigible thefts But they are wisely to consider every circumstance and the occasion that draweth one to steale whether he doe it of necessity to releeve his hungry soule or of an evill custome and obstinate minde to maintaine his lewd and unthrifty life In the first case it seemeth to be too sharpe to take away ones life unlesse he be such an one as will take no warning but continueth hardened in his sinne And so for simple and single theft only except it be in stealing of men unlesse it be aggravated by other circumstances concurring ãâã violence rapine obstinacie custome in sinne and such like neither the Law of Moses prescribeth punishment of death nor yet is it practised by our Lawes which in such cases intend favour by allowing the privilege of the booke See before p. 6. QUEST IV. Why the theefe breaking up might be killed Vers. 6. IF a theefe be found breaking up c. 1. R. Salomon thinketh that this Law which alloweth the theefe found breaking up an house to be slaine is understood not only of theeves that breake in by night but by day also and that clause which followeth When the Sunne riseth upon him they interpret metaphorically that if it be evident and manifest as the light that the theefe came not only to steale but to kill that whether by day or night he may be killed So also the Chalde Interpreter seemeth to follow the same sense Si oculus testium vidit eum If the eye of witnesses saw him that is if it were evident that he came not only as a theefe but to assault Contra. Though this be true that a man might defend himselfe even by day against him that assaulted his life yet this is not the meaning here the words of the Law are literally not metaphorically to be understood 2. The reason of this difference betweene a night theefe and a day theefe is because in the night breaking in it is not knowne whether he came to steale only or to murther but in the day it may easily appeare by his armour and weapons Tostat. Simler Beside in the day he may call for helpe against the theefe which cannot be so well done in the night when he is left without all other remedy but his owne defence Galas Marbach And in the day he may have witnesses of his theft and so convent him before the Magistrate Lippom. 3. The Romane Lawes allow not onely to kill a night theefe but a day theefe also si se telâ defenderit if he defend himselfe by a weapon Moses Law much disagreeth not for though he that commeth only as a theefe in the day time is not to be killed but to make restitution only yet if he come with weapons as having a murtherers intent now he may be repelled by force even as a night theefe may not now as a theefe but as one which commeth to assault and murther Iunius QUEST V. How it is made lawfull for a private man to kill a theefe Vers. 2. ANd be smitten that he dye no bloud shall be imputed 1. Cajetanus here observeth that this Law simply alloweth not to kill the theefe but if a man smite him in his owne defence not intending to kill him that in this case he shall be free Percussio fuit intenta mors autem per accidens sequnta c. He intended only to smite him but death followed accidentally upon such smiting so also Simler Non probat ut animo occidendi feriatur This Law alloweth not that he should be stricken with a minde to kill him sed indulget affectui c. but it beareth with a mans sudden passion if in defence of himselfe it so fall out that he be killed 2. But this Law seemeth not only to permit one to smite a night theefe but directly to kill him also so it be not with a desire to kill him where he may otherwise escape but to defend him and his from violence which he cannot doe unlesse the theefe be killed Borrh. 3. For seeing both the Law of nature and other Civill lawes doe allow a man to defend himselfe now when the Lawes doe arme a man they seeme publicam personam imponere to impose upon him a publike person so that now he smiteth not as a private man but by authority of the Law and in this case he is tanquam minister vindex Dei as the minister and revenger of God so that he doe it not of a lust and raging desire to be revenged but intending to use a lawfull defence in the safegard of his owne life Gallas And the case is here all one as if a man being set upon by the high way should kill him that maketh the assault upon him Marbach QUEST VI. After what manner the theefe was to be sold. Vers. 3. HE should be sold for his theft c. 1. So was also the Law among the Romans that the debter should be given up in bonds unto his creditor Whereupon Cato was wont to say Fures privates in nexu compedibus vivere publicos in aurâ purpura c. That private theeves lived in chaines and fetters but the publike in gold and purple c. But this custome because it seemed very hard was abrogated by the Law of Arcadius and Honorius Gallas 2. But here it must be considered whether the theefe were an Hebrew or a stranger if an Hebrew how great soever the debt were for his theft he could be but sold over for six yeeres for all Hebrew servants were to goe out free the seventh And as the theft was valued so should he serve more yeeres or fewer But if he were a stranger he might be sold over to serve all his life if the value of the theft were great if it were but small he was but to be sold to serve so many yeeres as might suffice to recompence the theft Tostat. QUEST VII Why the theefe is only punished double with whom the thing stollen is found Vers. 4. HE shall restore double 1. That is one beside that he stole because that is found in his hand which is stollen and so restored Iun. And so must the five oxen be taken which the theefe must make good five with that which was stollen Lippom. 2. Now the reasons why when the thing stollen is found only double must be restored and five or foure-fold when it was killed or sold are these 1. Because he seemeth to be the more cunning theefe when the thing stollen cannot be found 2. Adhuc difficilior ratio in investigando and it is harder to finde out the theft and therefore he is worthy to be more punished Simler 3. Potest haberi
against God Lippoman 7. As Princes are not to bee reviled so yet they may bee soberly and discreetly admonished not taunted or checked or malepertly rebuked Augustus was wont to say In libera civitate liberas esse linguas oportere That in a free city tongues ought to be free But herein the lenitie of those Christian Emperours Theodosius Honorius Arcadius was admirable who would have them subject to no punishment which spake evill of them for say they Si ex levitate profectum est contemnendum si ex insanla miseratione dignissimum si ab injuria remittendum If it come of lightnesse it was to be contemned if of madnesse to bee pitied if of wrong to bee remitted Gallas 8. There is here no punishment set for him that should raile on the Magistrate but seeing he that railed on his father and mother was to die for it chap. 21.17 much more worthie of death was he which should curse the Prince the father of the countrie Simler QUEST LII Whether S. Paul transgressed this law Act. 23. when hee called the high Priest painted wall and whether in deed he did it of ignorance BUt here by the way somewhat would be added concerning S. Pauls fact in calling Ananias the high Priest painted wall and afterward being told that he reviled Gods high Priest he excused himselfe by his ignorance alleaging this text Act. 23.4 5. 1. Some here answer that where he saith God shall smite thee thou white or painted wall that it was no imprecation but a prediction that God would punish him Genevens And in saying I knew not that he was the high Priest his meaning is Non se attendere debuisse quis ipse sit c. That he was not to regard what he was but what the Lord commanded him Marbach But if S. Paul had knowne him to be the high Priest and yet had spoken evill of him he had alleaged a text against himselfe neither can any extraordinarie motion or instinct of the spirit be pretended in stirring him up to doe an act against the law for God is not contrarie to himselfe 2. Some thinke that Paul speaketh ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as it were in mockage hee did see nothing in him worthie of the Priesthood and therefore did not acknowledge him to bee the high Priest Calvine Gallas Or because the Priesthood was now determined and abolished in Christ that hee did usurpe upon an office that belonged not unto him But this cannot stand neither for if S. Paul had knowne him to bee the high Priest though hee were an usurper or unworthie that place yet occupying that roome and place hee would have reverenced him for his place sake for even evill Magistrates are not to bee deprived of that honor which belongeth to their office as S. Paul said to Festus who had objected Too much learning maketh thee mad I am not mad O noble Festus he giveth him his title of honour though he were a partial Judge And Cyprian to this purpose saith Quamvis in falsis spoliatis Sacerdotibus umbram tamen ipsam inaâera Sacerdotalis nominis cogitans dixit c. Although in false Priests now spoiled and robbed of their place yet he considering the vaine shadow of the verie Priests name said I know not brethren c. Hee saith that Paul reverenced the very shadow and shew of the Priestly authoritie in them 3. Some thinke that Paul reverenced his place knowing him to bee the high Priest but taunted his person But Paul could not have reverenced the place and Priesthood but hee must needs also have given some honour to the man qui illo praeditus erat which bare that place and office Calvine 3. Procopius his opinion is this Paulus seipsum reprehendit colligit cum liberiâs invectus fuisset in summuni Pontificem Paul doth reprehend and recover himselfe having too freely inveighed against the high Priest But S. Paul in this place railed not at all for then he had offended against his owne doctrine Ephes. 4.29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouthes Though S. Paul had not knowne him to be the high Priest yet hee was not to revile nor speak evill of any 5. Iunius opinion is that Paul was utterly ignorant indeed that hee was the high Priest because he was a stranger and the high Priest was not discerned by his priestly apparell but when he went into the Temple Iunius further seemeth to thinke that Paul did not know him so much as to be a Judge for the Tribune or Captaine of the souldiers was the chiefe in that assemblie and the rest stood by on their feet 6. But it appeareth that Paul knew him to sit as Judge as hee saith Thou sittest to judge me according to the law c. But in the rest I subscribe unto his judgement that Paul non ironicè loquitur sed simpliciter spake not ironically but simplie and plainely that he knew him not to be high Priest and yet hee confesseth no error for hee railed not at all Nam longe differt justa reprehensio à maledicta A just reprehension farre differeth from rayling Gallas There are then two parts of Pauls answer for as they objected two things that he railed and that upon the high Priest so he answereth to the latter part excusing it by his ignorance that hee knew him not to bee the high Priest to the other hee also maketh answer out of his judgement and knowledge denying that hee had railed for hee knew well enough by the law that no ruler of the people ought to bee railed upon therefore S. Paul knowing him to siâ as a Judge though hee was utterly ignorant that he was the high Priest had sinned against his owne knowledge if hee had railed upon him So indeed as Cyprian saith Nihil contumeliose locutus est adversus sacerdotem Hee spake nothing contumeliously against the high Priest c. QUEST LIII What is understood here by abundance and licour Vers. 29. THine abundance or plentie and thy licour The Hebrew word signifieth teares 1. Some by the word melea fulnesse understand wine because it floweth abundantly by the other word dimah teares oyle because it is pressed forth by drops like unto teares Vatablus But in this sense the principall part of their fruits and increase should have beene omitted namely their corne and other dry fruits 2. Some by fulnesse understand the plentifull yeere by teares the barren yeere signifâing that even then when they had the least increase they should remember to pay their first fruits and oblations Cajetane But this seemeth too curious 3. Calvine will have plenitudinem fulnesse taken pro genere in generall for all kinde of increase and teares to be referred to one speciall kinde namely the licour 4. But D. Kimhi his exposition is more currant and R. Salomon agreeth with him whom Lyranus and Iunius follow that by fulnesse wee are to understand the ripe drie fruits and by teares the
and thereof is called terumah an heave-offering QUEST XXXIII What is here understood by the heave-offering Vers. 28 FOr it is an heave-offering of the children of Israel 1. Some by Terumah which is a speciall name signifying an heave-offering doe understand in generall an oblation Vatarlus But the same word being in the next verse before used in a speciall signification for an heave-offering must bee also so taken here 2. Some doe take it in that speciall sense but then they restraine it only to the shoulder before spoken of which is called the shoulder of the heave-offering Osiander But it is evident in that a perpetuall Law is made for Aaron and his sonnes what part they should have of the peace-offerings and they had as well the shaken breast as the shoulder that was lifted up Levit. 27.34 that this clause must be understood of both those parts before spoken of the breast and the shoulder 3. Some by the heaving here understand only the dividing and separating of these parts which was to be made by the children of Israel So Oleaster and in the same sense the Latine Interpreter translateth primitivae sunt they are the first things that is the principall or best of the offerings of the children of Israel But the word terumah being before used in that speciall signification for an heave-offering should bee also so taken here 4. Therefore this terme terumah heave-offering is given both to the shaken breast and heaved shoulder of the more principall motion for these gifts were first of all by the Priest lifted up and presented before God in the hands of the Priest and in that respect were called an heave-offering Borrh. QUEST XXXIV Of the mysticall application of the shaking to and fro and of the breast and shoulder of the ram given unto the Priests FOr the mysticall application of these rites and ceremonies 1. In that part of the sacrifice was shaken to and fro on every side it signified Deum totius terra esse Dominum that God is Lord of the whole earth Oleaster and beside it betokened that Christi vera victimae merita beneficia c. that the merits and benefits of Christ the true sacrifice should by the preaching of the Gospell be spread abroad into all the world Borrh. But the Hebrewes exposition is fond who would have hereby signified that all men from all parts of the world should come to Jerusalem ibi optimâ aurâ fruituros there to have their health and to enjoy an wholesome aire Ex Oleastro For wee see that not by comming to Jerusalem but in departing from the earthly Jerusalem with the carnall rites thereof by preaching of the Gospell the Gentiles have received health and salvation of their soules which is more precious than the health of the body 2. In that part of the sacrifice was given unto the offerers to eat it sheweth that Christ did not only deliver himselfe unto death for us sed etiam in cibum dare c. but also giveth himselfe to be our meat nourishing us unto eternall life as he saith Ioh. 6.54 My flesh is meat indeed my bloud is drinke indeed c. Marbach 3. And in that the breast and shoulder are given unto the Priest it teacheth as Gregorie well saith Vt quod de sacrificio praecipitur sumere hoc de seipso discat authori immolare That what he is commanded to take of the sacrifice he should learne himselfe to offer unto God quod toto pectore operâ c. that with all their heart and endevour they should watch upon their office Iun. Vt sint tanquam pectus humeri populi c. To be as the breast of the people to provide and take care for their soules and to bee as their shoulders to beare the burthen of their vocation Simler QUEST XXXV Of the consecrating of Aarons successour in his garments Vers. 29. ANd the holy garments c. 1. The Latine Interpreter readeth in the singular the holy garment but it is in the plurall bigdee garments for there was not one garment but many ten in all which were consecrated for the high Priest 2. The Priests which succeeded Aaron were not to use any other garments but those which Aaron was consecrated in as Eleazar put on Aaron priestly vesture when he was consecrated Priest in his fathers place Numb 20. Lyran. 3. And it is added shall be his sonnes after him whereby the use of these garments is not made generall to all the Priests but onely unto them which should succeed in the priesthood Cajetane 4. And this difference may be observed betweene the consecration of Aaron and his successour that Aaron in his consecration was both consecrated himselfe and his garments with him but his successour only was to be consecrated in those garments which needed not to be consecrated againe unlesse the old garments being old new were to be made in their place and then they were to be consecrated as Aarons priestly garments were at the first Tostat. quaest 13. 5. These garments the high Priest at the time of his consecration was to weare seven dayes together he was not afterward tied necessarily to weare them so long together but as his ministery and service required Tostat. qu. 14. QUEST XXXVI By whom the high Priests succeeding Aaron were consecrated Vers. 29. TO be consecrate therein 1. There were two high Priests consecrated extraordinarily first Aaron who received his consecration from Moses who was no Priest but only for the time executed that office in Aarons consecration secondly Eleazar was consecrated high Priest his father being yet living which was not afterward seene in any other succeeding high Priest for there could not be two high Priests together But Eleazar was consecrated his father yet living because the time of his death was certainly knowne as the Lord had shewed to Moses and immediatly after Eleazars consecration he died Numb 20 but this could not be knowne in any other high Priest 2. The rest of the high Priests which followed after Moses death were consecrated by the inferiour Priests Tistetus giveth an instance how the Pope at this day is consecrated by the Bishop of Hastia But the Gospell acknowledgeth no such high Priesthood and the Pope doth usurpe that place over other Churches therfore it is nothing to us how an usurper entreth A better instance may be given Act. 13.3 where certaine that were but Prophets and Doctors of the Church do yet lay their hands upon the Apostles Saul and Bernabas and so they did consecrate them to the worke whereunto they were called Therefore by the like example the inferiour Priests might consecrate the high Priest in the old Testament there being no other high Priest to do it QUEST XXXVII Whether Eleazar was consecrated after the manner here prescribed Vers. 30. THat sonne that shall be Priest in his stead c. Which is not understood onely of the next sonne of Aaron which should succeed him which
and the Angels upon this day Christ rose the holy Ghost was given and Manna descended from heaven first on this day serm detempor 251. Wherefore I cannot wholly condescend to Mercerus judgement who saith politiae causa retinuerunt Apostols diem dominicum Sabbato subrogatum that the Apostles for policy sake have retained the Lords day in stead of the Sabbath in 2 Gen. vers 3. A policy I grant in the use of the Lords day but that is neither the only nor chiefe reason of the institution thereof There are three causes of the observation of the Lords day a religious and holy use for the Lord to this end did consecrate this day by his owne example and commandement to bee spent in holy exercises the Civill or politicall use of the Lords day is for the rest of our selves our servants and catteâls the ceremoniall or symbolicall end was to shadow forth our spirituall rest in Christ in this last respect I confesse the ceremony of the Sabbath in part to be abolished for it is a symbole still of our everlasting rest in heaven Heb. 4.9 But in the other two respects the law of the Lords day is perpetuall for that as Philo saith it is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã festum populare a popular or generall festivall to be observed of all people for ever I doe wonder then this doctrine of the Sabbath and day of rest now called the Lords day having such evident demonstration out of the scriptures and being confirmed by the constant and continuall practice of the Church in all ages that any professing the Gospell specially being exercised in the study of the scriptures should gainsay and impugne these positions following as erronious 1. That the commandement of sanctifying the Sabbath is naturall morall and perpetuall for if it be not so then all the commandements contained in the decalogue are not morall so should we have nine only and not ten commandements and then Christ should come to destroy the Law not to fulfill it contrary to our Saviours owne words Matth. 5.17 2. That all other things in the law were so changed that they were cleane taken away as the priesthood the sacrifices and the sacraments this day namely the Sabbath was so changed that it yet remaineth for it is evident by the Apostles practice Acts 20.7 1 Cor. 16.2 Apocal. 1.10 that the day of rest called the Sabbath was changed from the seventh day to the first day of the weeke and so was observed and kept holy under the name of the Lords day 3. That it is not lawfull for us to use the seventh day to any other end but to the holy and sanctified end for which God in the beginning created it for this were presumption to alter Gods appointment and the will and ordinance of the Creator must stand in the use of the creature otherwise the Apostle had not reasoned well for the use of meats from the end of the creation which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving 4. As the Sabbath came in with the first man so must it not goe out but with the last for if the keeping of a day of rest holy unto the Lord bee a part of the morall law as it cannot bee denyed then must it continue as long as the Lord hath his Church on earth and the morall Sabbath must stand till the everlasting Sabbath succeed in place thereof 5. That we are restrained upon the Sabbath from work both hand and foot as the Jewes were though not in such strict particular manner as they were for whom it was not lawful to kindle a fire upon the Sabbath Exod. 35.2 yet in generall wee are forbidden all kind of worke upon the Lords day as they were which may hinder the service of God saving such workes as either charity commandeth or necessity compelleth for it is a part of the morall precept in it thou shalt doe no manner of worke 6. That the Lord would have every Sabbath to be sanctâfied by the Minister and the people and that in the Church he ought to preach the word and they to heare it every Sabbath day but not each of these under paine of condemnation as the place is misconstrued is confirmed by the practice of our blessed Saviour Luke 4.16 and of S. Paul Act. 13.14 and 20.7 And hereunto are the Canons of our Church agreeable which require that every Minister preach every Lords day and likewise catechise the youth 7. That the Lord hath commanded so precise a rest unto all sorts of men that it may not by any fraud deceit or circumvention whatsoever be broken under the paine of his everlasting displeasure who doubteth of this but that every breach of any part of the morall law especially by deceit and circumvention deserveth in it selfe Gods curse and everlasting dâspleasure as the Apostle saith the wages of sinne is death and the Law saith Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the law to doe them as the Apostle citeth this text This doctrine of the Sabbath first grounded upon the authority of scripture hath accordingly beene ratified by the constant and perpetuall practice of the Church Origen saith In nostro Dominico die semper pluit Dominus Manna de coelo in our Lords day the Lord alwayes raineth Manna from heaven Hierome Dominicus dâes orationi tantum lectionibus vacat upon the Lords dayes they onely give themselves to prayer and reading Ambrose tota diâ sit vobis oratio vellectio c. nulle actus seculi actus divinitatis impedâant c. Let us all the day be conversant in prayer or reading let no secular acts hinder divine acts let no table play carry away the mind Augustine quomâdo Maria mater Domini c. As Mary the mother of our Lord is the chiefe among women so among other ãâã this is the mother of the rest the whole grace of the Sabbath and the ancient festiâity of the people of the Iewes is changed into the solemnity of this day Concil Tullen cap. 19. Oportet eos qui praesunt Ecclesiis c it behoveth those which are set over the Churches upon all dayes but especially upon the Lords dayes to teach the people c. Matisconens 2. cap. 1. Exhibeamus Deo liberam servitutem c. Let us exhibite unto God our free service not because the Lord requireth this of us to celebrate the Lords day by corporall abstinence but he looketh for obedience whereby we treading downe all terrene rites might be raised up to heaven But these allegations are here superfluous seeing there is a learned Treatise of the Sabbath already published of this argument which containeth a most sound doctrine of the Sabbath as is laid downe in the former positions which shall be able to abide the triall of the word of God and stand warranted thereby when other humane fantasies shall
Hebrew ach to be read as an adversative as Paulus Burgensis readeth veruntamen notwithstanding as though the sense should be this though yee are permitted to shed the bloud of beasts yet it is unlawfull for you to shed the bloud of man 3. Neither is this another exception concerning mans food as Cajetane that as before the bloud of beasts is excepted so here humane flesh that if it be not lawfull to shed the bloud of man neither is it to eat his flesh which first must be kiâled before it be eaten 4. Neither need there to be here understood any sentence as this I will not have you to shed mans bloud and then this to follow as a reason for this prohibition to shed mans bloud followeth directly in the next verse 5. But this word translated for may be read as a causall why God would have them abstaine from all cruelty or savage behaviour in eating of the bloud of beasts that they should have a greater detestation of the spilling or shedding of mans bloud Perer. Mercer QVEST. VII How God will require the bloud of man at the hand of beasts Vers. 5. AT the hand of every beast 1. Rupertus by beast understandeth the Devill that shall answer for the death of mens soules but Moses here directly speaketh of the bodily life which is in the spirits and bloud 2. Neither by beasts here are understood cruell and beastiall men for it followeth afterward aâ the hands of man will I require it c. 3. Neither doth Moses insinuate the death of martyrs which were exposed to beasts for which the persecutors shall answer for that did cast the Saints before the beasts 4. But here is shadowed forth that Law which was afterward published that even the beast that killeth a man should be stoned Exod. 22. QVEST. VIII How his bloud shall be shed that sheddeth bloud Vers. 6. BY man shall his bloud be shed 1. Some reade in homine and referre it to the first clause Hee that sheddeth mans bloud in man as they which are strangled have their bloud shed as it were in them sic Tostatus but in this sense one kinde of murther onely should be prohibited 2. Some read in homine against man that is in despite of man Cajetan 3. But the best reading is per hominem by man and to referre it to the last clause by man shall his bloud be shed that is by the Magistrate as the Chalde interpreteth by witnesse by the sentence of the Iudge for it should seeme that before the floud there was no law made nor power given to man to punish murther as Adam proceeded not against Cain that killed his brother Abel Mercer 4. And this must be understood not de facto sed de jure merito not of the fact for many times murtherers escape but of the right and due desert of murtherers that they are by Gods Law worthy of death and many times where the law of man faileth that such are not executed Gods vengeance overtaketh them such are either slaine in battell or by the hands of other or by some other meanes as it is in the Psalme men of bloud shall not live halfe their daies Psalm 55.24 Calvin QVEST. IX That mans life should be preserved because of Gods image IN the image of God c. 1. Hence it followeth not as Oleaster collecteth that the image of God is in mans body because the image in the soule cannot be by the killing of the body destroyed for the reason concludeth well though this image of God be not in the body yet because the body is the Tabernacle of the soule and beareth that which beareth the image of God it ought for that cause to be reverenced and yet the image of God though not originally or principally yet by the consequent and effects is expressed and shineth in some sort in mans body in that it is made upright and aspiring to celestiall things and so sutable to the soule and in regard that into the hand of man God hath delivered the rule and dominion of the creatures cap. 1. vers 28. 2. Though the image wherein man was created be much decayed and impaired yet some part thereof remaineth for the which the life of man should be spared and preserved Calvin 3. And if for this reason the life of any man whatsoever should be regarded much more the life of Christians in whom this image is renewed in Christ Muscul. QVEST. X. Of the Raine Bow Vers. 13. I Have set my bow in the cloud c. 1. Neither Ambrose conceit can be admitted who understandeth not here the visible Raine-Bow in the clouds but the invisible power of God whereby he sometime intendeth sometime remitteth his judgements as a bow is bent and unbent againe But this collection is contrary to the text which saith The Bow shall be seene in the cloud vers 14. 2. Neither is their opinion found that thinke there was neither raine noâ Raine-Bow before the floud for how could the plants and fruits of the earth have beene so many yeares preserved without raine so then the Raine-Bow was before the floud but it beganne onely now to be a signe of this covenant betweene God and man as the Lord chuseth sometime naturall things for signes as Bread and Wine and Water in the Sacraments Mercer 3. Neither is the opinion of some Hebrewes to be admitted that thinke the Raine-Bow to have beene before the floud but then it appeared in the cleare aire now in a cloud for the iris or Bow can have no existence or being but in a dewing or stilling cloud Mercer 4. Neither is Thomas Aquinas judgement and Cajetanus sound which thinke that the Râine-Bow is partly a naturall signe that there shall be no floud because the Raine-bow sheweth not but when the clouds are thinne and dispersed whereas thicke and blacke clouds ingender inundations for the causes of the generall floud were not naturall and God without the clouds by the overflowing onely of the waters could drowne the world and beside if the Rain-bow were a naturall signe then before the floud came it might have prognosticated so much but then it should have beene a lying signe for notwithstanding the Raine bowes often appearing before the deluge as it is like the floud came 5. Though the Raine-bow bee not a naturall signe but voluntary depending upon the will and institution of God yet notwithstanding hath it some agreement with that which it is made a signe of like as baptisme in the flesh hath some resemblance of the soule so the Raine-bow is a fit and convenient signe to portend no inundation likely to follow because it is orâinarily a signe either of faire weather or of no long raine And it hath beene observed that a Raine-bow in the morning betokeneth showers in the evening faire weather Beside the Raine-bow is found to be wholesome to plants and herbs that where it lighteth it giveth them a more pleasant and
it for a recompence for taking Sarah away as the Septuagint read and Chrysostome expoundeth 2. Or to buy Sarah and her maid vailes to hide their beauty that others be not intangled ex Perer. 3. Or that it was a gift of honour to shew that Sarah was both chaste and innocent Latine translat and the great Bible so also Rasi 2. It is not understood of this excuse or dissimulation which Sarah used as though the sense should be this that she might use this vaile or colour of the truth among her ownr for they could not bee deceived but among strangers she should plainly confesse her selfe to be Abrahams wife Lyranus Tâstatus for what needed Sarah to use any such excuse where she was knowne 3. Some doe referre it as well to Abraham as to the gift and to all that now hapned that they were signes of Sarahs chastity Mercer But the better interpretation is to apply it to Abraham that he should be the veile of her eyes 1. That no man knowing her to be Abrahams wife should looke upon her to desire her Aben Ezra Cajeâân 2. It also putteth Sara in minde of her subjection to Abraham whereof the veile is a signe 1 Cor. 11. â0 3. Oleaster also further stretcheth it that Abraham was her veile that is her just excuse that she did this for his cause being by him perswaded but the former exposition is the better QUEST XIII How Sarah was reproved SHe was thus reproved 1. The 70. reade speake the truth that is that I am innocent and touched theâ noâ but this reading dissenteth from the originall 2. So doth the Latine remember thou art deprehended Lyppoman saith it should be read reprehensam reprehended not deprehensam deprehended 3. Iunius readeth all this is done that thou maist be learned 4. But the better reading is all this was that sheâ might be reproved or in all this she reproved her selfe so that they seeme to be the words rather of the writer concerning Sarah than of Abimelech to Sarah QUEST XIV Whether Abimelech were smitten with any disease Vers. 17. GOd healed Abimelech c. for the Lord had shut up every wombe 1. Aben Ezra is not right that thinketh that Abimelech himselfe was stricken with no disease but that he is said so to be because his wife and maidens were punished for the text it selfe saith that God healed Abimelech and it is most like that God sent upon him some infirmity in his secrets whereby he was kept from comming neare to Sarah QUEST XV. What the shutting up of the wombe signifieth 2. THe shutting up of the wombe is not to bee understood as Pererius doth of the difficulty of bringing forth for then the children being ready for birth and staying longer than their time should have beene suffocated and the text saith the Lord had shut up every wombe but all were not great with childe at one instant Neither need we with Calvin because in so short a time Sarah being conceived with childe of Isaack and not yet delivered there could be no experience or triall of their sterility and barrennesse to say the history is transposed and was done before for Abraham till now had no occasion to sojourne in Gerar therefore the meaning is that the women were hindred from conception so signifieth the shutting up of the wombe as the opening of the wombe betokeneth aptnes to conceive as we reade Gen. 29.31 The Hebrewes affirme that not onely in the women but the men also all their pores and passages were stopped as well of the mouth to take meat as of other places that expell them and that the hens could not lay their egges but the text beareth it not 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. Adultery a sinne punishable with death Vers. 3. THou art but dead c. God threatneth death to Abimelech conditionally if he did not restore Abrahams wife Iun. whereby we see that in the justice of God adulterie is a sinne to be punished by death as Iudas adjudged Thamar to the fire for whoredome Gen. 38.24 Where the law then is more gentle than to inflict the punishment of death upon adulterers they may thanke the lenity of the Magistrate which useth not that rigour which may well stand with justice 2. Doct. Ignorance excuseth not sinne Vers. 6. I Kept thee that thou shouldest not sinne against mee c. Abimelech then if hee had touched Sarai though he did not know her to be anothers wife had sinned ignorance then excuseth not sinne though it doe some what extenuate and qualifie it Muscul. as it is in the Gospell He that knew not his masters will and yet did commit many things worthy of stripes shall be beaten with few stripes Luk. 12.48 he that sinneth willingly shall receive more stripes and he that falleth of ignorance shall have some also 3. Doct. The whole family blessed because of the Master Vers. 7. THou shalt die the death and all thou hast as the sin of the Master of the house bringeth a judgement upon the whole familie so the Lord also sheweth mercy to the whole house for the masters sake Luk. 19.9 This day is salvation come into this house because he is become the sonne of Abraham 5. Places of confutation 1. Confut. No perfect righteousnesse in this life Vers. 5. WIth an upright minde and innocent hands c. This place is no ground for their opinion that thinke a man in this life may attaine to perfect justice for Abimelech doth not absolutely cleare himselfe from all sinne but onely in this particular in this degree of sinne that he had not committed willingly any act of uncleannesse with Sarah Calvin as the Prophet David useth to plead for himselfe Psal. 7.3 If I have done this thing if there be any wickednesse in my hands c. he onely purgeth himselfe from the suspition of a particular fact 2. Confut. The Scripture sendeth us not to pray to the dead but to be holpen by the prayers of the living Vââs 7. HE is a Prophet and shall pray for thee c. Neither doth this place make for the invocation of Saints that are departed for God sendeth not Abimelech to Noah or any other departed to pray for him but to Abraham then living Calvin The living then may pray for the living which duty may be mutually performed in charity while one knoweth anothers necessities But for the living to pray to or for the dead which know not their wants and they are already certainly disposed of in an unchangeable state as the living are not it hath no warrant upon any precept or example of Scripture or any sound reason drawne from thence 3. Confut. Against the heresie of the Tritheists Vers. 13. WHen God caused me to wander out of my fathers house c. The word is âlohim Gods in the plurall number which maketh some to understand the Angels Vatablus Calvin but God and not the Angels first called Abraham from his Country fathers house
Secondly Iacob putteth on sackcloth which was a ceremonie used in the East Countreyes to testifie their humility as Benhadads servants presented themselves before the King of Israel with sackcloth about their loines and ropes about their necks suing for pardon 1 King 20. Perer. QUEST XXVIII Who were those sonnes and daughters that comforted Iacob Vers. 35. THen all his sonnes and daughters rose up c. 1. These were not properly Iacobs daughters as the Hebrewes imagine that with every sonne Iacob had a daughter borne which they afterward married for such marriages the world being now multiplied were not in use among the faithfull Mercer 2. Neither could Iacobs sonnes the eldest not exceeding twenty foure or twenty five yeares not above seven yeares elder than Ioseph have daughters of that age able to comfort their father as Musculus thinketh they were therefore Iacobs sonnes wives that were his daughters in law 3. Neither did Iacob refuse to bee comforted because as the Hebrewes thinke where wee know certainly of the death of our friend we cease mourning but not where it is uncertaine whether they be dead or no for Iacob did perswade himselfe here that some wilde beast had devoured Ioseph but the greatnesse of his griefe would admit no consolation Mercer 4. We see the hard and cruell hearts of Iacobs sonnes that willingly did suffer their father to continue in this griefe and that with fained words they seemed to comfort him concealing the truth Luther 5. So it is added his father wept for him not Isaack who indeed was yet living as some thinke Aben Ezra Iun. But Iacob mourned for Ioseph his brethren mourned not but the father sorroweth for his sonne Muscul. QUEST XXIX Potiphar how he is said to be an Eunuch Vers. 36. TO Potiphar an Eunuch of Pharaohs 1. This Potiphar was not indeed an Eunuch or gelded man as the Septuag reade ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã for he had a wife and a daughter married afterward to Ioseph 2. Neither for the same cause can that conceit of R. David have any likelihood that Potiphar was an Eunuch in part as retaining still the nerve or sinew though not the other instruments of generation 3. Neither is there any ground of that tradition of the Hebrewes that God caused Potiphars privie parts to wither and drie up because he thought to abuse faire Ioseph to his filthy lust 4. But whereas Eunuches were at the first used by Kings and Princes to wait upon their Queenes Esther 2.14 and so were as the Chamberlaines and neare unto their persons as Harbonah was to King Assuerus Esther 7.9 Hence the name of Eunuch was taken generally to signifie a Courtier Prince or great man toward the King as the word is used 2 King 8.6 The King commanded an Eunuch or one of his Princes to restore unto the Shunamite her lands and in this sense is Potiphar called an Eunuch that is one of Pharaos princes or courtiers as the word Saras signifieth sic Chal. Mercer Iun. with others QUEST XXX What officer Potiphar was to Pharao PHaraos chiefe Steward or master of the guard 1. For we neither reade with the Septuag Pharaos chiefe cooke although the word tabach be sometime used in that sense 1 Sam. 9.23 which reading Iosephus Philo and Ambrose follow 2. Neither yet was he Pharaos chiefe steward as some reade B.G. 3. Nor the chiefe captaine of his souldiers as both the Chalde and Hierome translate 4. But seeing the word tabach signifieth to kill and so the word is indifferently applyed both to Cookes and Butchers that are the slaughter men of beasts and to souldiers that kill men in battell and executioners that put men to death that are condemned by the law It appeareth that this Potiphar had the chiefe charge of those that were adjudged to imprisonment or death as Pharaos two officers his chiefe Baker and Butler were committed to his charge Gen. 40.3 and so may be well thought to be the chiefe Marshall or Captaine of the Guard unto Pharaoh Iunius Mercerus 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. The father is as the Sunne and chiefe in the house Vers. 9. THe Sunne Moone and Stars did reverence unto me c. Ioseph by the Sunne and Moone understandeth his father and mother The father then of the house by Gods ordinance as the Sun from whom the wife as the Moone the children as Stars must receive their light and direction in every family Muscul. for the Apostle saith concerning wives If they will learne any thing let them aske of their husbands at home 1 Cor. 14.35 and concerning the rest the same Apostle saith Having children under obedience with all honesty 1 Timoth. 3.4 2. Doct. The Prophets did not forsee all things but what was revealed unto them AGaine he dreamed c. Ioseph as Bernard well noteth did by the spirit of prophecie foresee his exaltation yet his humiliation and captivity was not declared unto him though this was nearer than the other tractat de gradib humilitat Whereby we see that the Prophets did not foresee all things neither had they a propheticall spirit residing with them whereby to foretell what they would but they onely knew those things which it pleased God to reveale unto them as the Prophet Ieremie at the first did not perceive the falshood of the Prophet Hananie that prophesied of their returne from captivity after two years but wished that it might fall out even so till the word of God came unto him Ier. 28.6.12 3. Doct. True obedience followeth not the words but the minde of the commander Vers. 7. IOseph went after his brethren and found them in Dothan c. Yet his father sent him onely to seeke them in Sechem vers 12. Ioseph sheweth his prompt obedience in not strictly tying himselfe to his fathers words but fulfilling his minde Iacob spake but of Sechem to Ioseph but he knowing that it was his meaning that hee should seeke out his brethren followeth after them to Dothan that hee might finde them out Muscul. by which example we are taught what kinde of obedience is most accepted with God not to keepe onely the letter of the law as the Scribes did whose corrupt glosses our Saviour confuteth Matth. 5. but to observe the true meaning and sense thereof 5. Places of Confutation 1. Confut. The Latine text corrupt and not justifiable Vers. 2. WHen Ioseph was seventeene yeares old The Latine text readeth most corruptly When Ioseph was sixteene yeare old which reading Perer. would justifie by these reasons 1. The Latine text understandeth sixteene yeares complete the Hebrewes seventeene yeares now but begun 2. He thinketh that the Latine translator set downe divers things whereof no reason can bee given not without the secret instinct of the spirit Pererius disput 1. in Gen. cap. 37. Contra. 1. It is the manner of the Hebrewes when they set downe a number of yeares to make the account by full and complete yeares as is manifest by the phrase here used He
sometime be used appellatively for a merchant Prov. 31.24 But he was a Canaanite as we reade the like of Simeon that he had his sonne Saul by a Canaanitish woman Gen. 46.10 Mercer 3. No marvell then if Iudah matching into the cursed stocke of Canaan whose land was promised to Abraham and his seed which Iudah could not be ignorant of had no good successe in his children the fruits of this marriage who also were accursed of God Calvin 4. Iudah saw this woman he tooke her and went in to her all was done in haste so that his affection carried him headlong his judgement did not guide him Muscul. QUEST V. Er and Onan whence and upon what occasion so called Vers. 6. IVdah tooke a wife to Er his first-borne 1. Though Iudah tooke him a wife without the consent of his father yet he will not have his sonne so to doe Muscul. 2. Whence he is called Er it is not certaine some will have it to signifie watchfull Augustine doth interpret it pelliceus to have his name of skinne or leather such as Adam was cloathed with in token of his transgression lib. 22. cont Faust. cap. 84. Isaack Carus will have all these three sonnes to be named from Iosephs calamity Er because Ioseph was in a manner desolate or destroyed of gnariri Onan of the griefe of their father Shelah of the errour which Iudah committed in selling of Ioseph Ramban thinketh Onan to be so called of the paine of his mother in travell as Rachel called Benjamin Ben-oni and Shelah of his mothers errour in ceasiâg to beare afterward But if it bee lawfull to use conjectures I thinke upon what occasion soever they had these names given at the first that the event answered their names for Er was solitary without children Onan had a lamentable end and about Shelah Iudah committed a great errour with Thamar 3. Iudah gave Er his name the mother named the other two not that as the Hebrewes note the father did alwayes name the first-borne the mother the rest for as we saw before in Iacobs sonnes sometime the father sometime the mother indifferently gave the name but not without the consent of the father Mercer 4. Concerning Thamar some Hebrewes would have her the daughter of Seâ the high Priest Melchisedeck because Iudah judgeth her to be burned according to the law of the Priests daughter committing fornication Levit. 21.8 but seeing Sem died ten yeare before Iacob he lived not to the 50. yeare of Iacobs as Mercerus it cannot be that Thamar a childe-bearing woman should bee his daughter Iacob being at the least an hundred yeare old It is like she was a Canaanitish woman Luther and a vertuous woman that did leave and forsake the idolatry of her Countrey to worship the true God Perer. ex Philone QUEST VI. Of the sinne of Er what it was Vers. 7. NOw Er was wicked in the sight of the Lord. 1. The wickednesse of Er was not as Augustine supposeth in being given to oppression or cruelty lib. 22. cont Faust. cap. 34. but it is like to be the same sinne of unnaturall lust which Onan committed as may be gathered both by the likenesse of the punishment as by the phrase that he was wicked in the sight of God as it is said of the Sodomites Gen. 13.13 his sinne was not secret as Tostatus but it was a sinne very hainous and grievous against the order of nature and institution of God for he abused himselfe and spoiled his seed not because he would not have any issue by a Canaanitish woman as Mercer for then he needed not to have maried her but rather as the Hebrewes conjecture that hee might long enjoy the beauty and favour of Thamar which would be impaired by bearing of children or some such like cause 2. So then this sinne was against nature which is diversly commited either alone when men doe vitiously procure and provoke their seed or with others either of a divers kinde as with bruit beasts or with the same kinde but not the right sex as with the male or with the right sex that is the female but not in due manner which was the sinne of Er and Onan 3. This sinne of Er was against the order of nature using the act of generation for pleasure onely and not for generation it was against God whose institution he brake against his wife whom he defrauded of the fruit of her wombe against himselfe in preventing his issue against mankinde which should have beene increased and propagated Perer. 4. Yet Onans sinne was not lesse than Ers as Augustine thinketh who maketh Er of that sort of wicked men that doe evill to others Onan of that kinde that doe no good to others but herein Onan exceedeth the wickednesse of Er both because he was not warned by his brothers example as Daniel reproveth Belthasar because his heart was not humbled by the fall of Nebuchadnezer his father Dan. 5.22 As also for that Onan committed this sinne of envie against his brother to whom hee should have raised seed whereas Er did it not of envie but of an immoderate desire of pleasure Perer. QUEST VII Whether in any case it were lawfull by Moses law for one to marry his brothers wife Vers. 8. IVdah said c. goe in to thy brothers wife Here a question is moved whether it were lawfull by Moses law for the brother to marry his brothers widow to raise up seed to his brother 1. Philo thinketh that it was not onely lawfull among the Israelites but that it was the custome so to doe among the Canaanites and that the Judges of the Countrey did give Thamar to Onan after the death of his brother Er but the contrary is evident out of the text for Iudah and not the Judges of the Countrey gave Thamâr to Onan And I thinke rather that it was a custome received among the fathers and afterward confirmed by Moses law than any usage learned of the Canaanites whose fashions they were not to imitate 2. Neither doe I thinke with the Hebrewes that Iudah was the first that brought in this kinde of marriage though hee be first mentioned but that he had received that custome from other of the fathers 3. Wherefore it seemeth that Moses gave liberty to the next brother to take the wife of his brother that departed without issue and not to the next removed kinsman onely that was without the compasse of the Leviticall degrees and so some expound that law Deut. 25.5 sic Genevens upon that place D. Fulk in 6. Mark annot 2. But the other sense approved by Mercerus Calvin Iunius which understand it of the naturall brother seemeth more probable for these reasons 1. Because the first president of such marriages is taken from this place where one naturall brother succeedeth another in taking his wife 2. The word used in the law Deut. 25.5 jabam signifieth not to doe the office of a kinsman but of
Priest as the Hebrewes imagine for he died ten yeares before Iacob was borne who was now above 100. yeare old and therefore Melchisedeck could not have a daughter so young to beare children neither was this punishment arbitrary in Iudah and inflicted without law according to his pleasure Burgens for Iudah had no such authority there nor yet as Lyranus and Tostatus was she worthy of the fire because she had committed not simple fornication but adultery because she was by law obliged to the third brother and so in a manner espoused for it was not adultery for the widow of the brother to marrie with some other than the surviving brother else Naomi would never have advised her daughters in law to get them other husbands in their owne Countrey Ruth 1.9 But I rather thinke that Thamars adultery was in this that she had played the whore whereas Iudah had betrothed and espoused her to Selah and that Iudah who never was minded to give Selah to Thamar fearing lest he might die also as is evident vers 11. was very forward to take this occasion to be rid of Thamar that Selah might not marrie her 3. But herein appeareth Iudahs too much rigour and injustice that before the matter was examined gave sentence and was partiall the truth being knowne in his owne cause and further it was a savage part to put to death a woman great with childe which is contrary both to divine and humane lawes for it is written Deut. 24.16 The fathers shall not bee put to death for the children nor the children for the fathers but if Thamar had now died the infant had died with her The Romans had a law that the execution of a woman with childe should be deferred till she had brought forth the same also was practised among the Athenians Aeltan lib. 5. And therefore Claudius the Emperour is noted for his cruelty that spared not to put to death women with childe Perer. ex Dion lib. 57. QUEST XI Wherefore the Midwife useth a red threed and what colour it was of Vers. 28. THe midwife bound a red threed c. 1. It is so rather to be read than with Oleaster a twine or double threed the word sani here used commeth indeed of sanah that signifieth to double which is rather to be referred to the double die and colour than the double matter Iun. Tostatus also is much deceived here that taketh it not for a red but a blacke colour twice died ex Perer. 3. The Midwife tied this red threed as a marke of the first-borne because he first put forth his hand and the purple colour very well agreeth to the birth-right or eldership Muscul. QUEST XII Whence Pharez was so called and whereof he is a type Vers. 29. HOw hast thou broken thy breach upon thee 1. Hierome is deceived that of this word pharatz that signifieth to breake or divide thinketh the Pharises to have taken denomination whereas they had their name rather of Pharas which signifieth to disperse or separate because they were separate from other in profession of life and their apparell Mercer 2. This story hath bin diversly allegorized by the fathers some by Pharez understand the beleeving Gentiles by Zarah the Israelites and by the red threed their bloudy circumcision sacrifices sic Iren. Cyril Some contrariwise will have Phares to signifie the Jewes Zarah the beleeving Gentiles Chrysost. 3. But this Phares is more fitly a type and figure of Christ who hath broken downe the partition wall and hath broken the power of hell and death Mercer And by this strange and extraordinary birth the Lord would have Iudah and Thamar admonished of the sin which they had committed and to be humbled thereby though he in his mercie had forgiven it Calvin 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. The difference betweene the apparelling of widowes and wives Vers. 14. SHe put her widowes garment off c. It seemeth that it was the use in those dayes for widowes to be knowne from wives by their mourning and grave apparell in which case more is permitted to women that are married whom the Apostle alloweth to adorne themselves with comely and sober apparell without pride or excesse 1 Timoth. 2.9 to please and content their husbands but widowes having no husbands to whose liking they should apparell themselves ought not to decke themselves to please other mens eyes Luther 2. Doct. Friendship ought alwayes to be joyned with pietie Vers. 20. IVdah sent a kid by the hand of his friend This Hârah Iudahs friend did performe an evill office in being as it were a broker for Iudah who should neither have requested any dishonest or uncomely thing of his friend nor the other yeelded unto it love truth and piety ought not to be separated as Saint Iohn saith Whom I love in the truth Epist. 3.1 Muscul. 3. Doct. Adultery in former times punished by death Vers. 24. LEt her bee burnt We see that even among the Canaanites adultery was judged worthy of death for Iudah inventeth no new kinde of punishment but speaketh according to the law and custome of that Countrey So the Lord himselfe said to Abimelech that had taken Sarai unto him Behold thou art but a dead man for this c. Gen. 20.3 Now although this law as peculiar to that Countrey bindeth not now neither in respect of the kinde of death for by Moses law onely the Priests daughter if she played the whore was burned Levit. 21.9 the rest were stoned nor yet in the inequality of the law for the women offending were burned the men escaped as appeareth in Iudah Calvin whereas both adulterers and adulteresses are alike guilty and though then there was greater cause of keeping their seed uncorrupt for preserving of their lives and the distinction of families in which respect it may be thought somewhat of the former rigour and severity may be abated yet this example condemneth the security and connivence of magistrates in these dayes in the punishing of this sinne when as faults of lesse nature are more severely censured than adultery And whereas the president of our Saviour is urged by some for the mitigation of the punishment of adultery because he would not condemne the woman taken in adulterie it doth not serve their turne for this mercie Christ shewed not to cleare or exempt the adulteresse leaving her to the magistrate but partly to shew that he came not to be a judge in such causes as neither in other like businesses as dividing of the inheritance Luk. 12.14 partly by this example he would teach what is to be required in the person of an accuser not to bee guilty of that crime whereof he accuseth others 5. Places of Confutation 1. Confut. That it is not lawfull upon any occasion to marrie the brothers wife Vers. 8. GOe into thy brothers wife Because in this place as also Deut. 25.5 it is permitted to naturall brethren to marry the wives of their brother deceased Bellarmine
requiring this as a reward and recompence for this good tidings But by this he sheweth the certaintie of the Butlers good successe and favour with the King that if he made but mention of him to Pharaoh he might be delivered neither doth he aske this as a reward but taketh this occasion to do himselfe good for it is lawfull for a man to use all honest meanes for his libertie as the Apostle saith Art thou called being a servant care not for it yet if thou canst be free use it rather 1 Cor. 7.21 Calvin 3. It may be that Ioseph was some what too confident upon this meanes as though this were the way that God had appointed for his deliverance and therefore God would exercise Iosephs patience still so that Ioseph failed not in diffidence and distrust in betaking himselfe to the meanes but rather herein that he limiteth Gods providence both for the meanes and the time that even now and by this meanes he hasteth to be delivered Calvin Mercer QUEST IIII. How Ioseph is said to be stollen away Vers. 15. I Was stolen away by theft out of the land of the Hebrewes 1. This theft was not committed by the Ismaelites who bought Ioseph for their money but by his owne bretheren who committed a theft two waies both because they sold a freeman not taken in battel nor brought into bondage which by Moses Law was punished with death Exod. 21.16 and in that they did robbe their father of his child Perer. 2. Hebron is not here meant by the land of the Hebrews as Ramban because that was the principall place of abode for Abraham Isaack and Iacob but the land of Canaan is thus called where the Hebrewes dwelt which Ioseph so calleth rather than Canaan because he abhorred to be counted of that nation Mercer QUEST V. How the chiefe Baker his head is said to be lifted up ãâã leavied Vers. 19. WIthin three daies Pharaoh shall take thine head from thee or leavie thine head off from thee c. 1. Iunius readeth thus Pharaoh numbering thee shall cause theâ no more to be numbered and hee referreth it as before to the removing or taking away of his pegge which he taketh for his head out of his hole or place in the table but this seemeth to be too curious 2. Neither with some other doe I thinke that the chiefe Baker was beheaded for the text saith he was hanged upon a tâee which needed not if he were first beheaded 3. Some make the meaning of the phrase to be this that Pharaoh would take away his life from him and the Latines say capite plecti to lose the head that is to be put to death hence they are called capitall crimes that are punished by the losse of the head or life Mercer 4. The most reade shall take thine head from thee but he was hanged not beheaded 5. Some thinke he was first beheaded and then hanged as the manner is yet in some countries Osiand But in that the Butlers head was lift up as well as the Bakers vers 20. this phrase doth not shew his punishment for then the effect vers 20. should not answer to the prophecie 6. Some understand it of his hanging that his head was lift up upon him as our Saviour calleth his hanging upon the crosse his exaltation or lifting up Ioh. 3.14 Pellican But this cannot be the meaning because the same phrase is used both of the Butler and Baker 7. This therefore is the sense that Pharaoh should lift up his head aloft out of prison and cause his name to be rehearsed and so his head to be leavied among the rest of his servants and take cognizance of both their causes but the one he should hang and restore the other So Ioseph doth foretell unto them three things whereof the first the leavying of the head and examining their cause is common to them both the other two things are peculiar to either the Butler shall be restored to his office and minister the cup to the King vers 13. the Baker shall be put from his office and no more reckoned or leavied among the officers and be hanged this then is the true reading of the words Pharaoh shall leavie thine head from upon thee that is that no more leavying or reckoning be made upon thee which words may be supplied by the contrarie vers 13. and the exposition of the praeposition ghal used there to thine office and mâghal from off expressed here doe insinuate as much so also the same word meghaleca from off thee is used in the end of this verse and Deut. 8.4 Thy garments ãâã not waxe old from off thee that is to be no more upon thee and so to be used by thee QUEST VI. Whether Ioseph used any preamble to his interpretation Vers. 19. THe birds shall eat thy flesh 1. It is like that Ioseph being to deliver so hard an interpretation of the Bakers dreame did use some preface to excuse himselfe as Philo bringeth him in thus speaking Vtinam tale somnium non vidisses c. I would thou hadst either not seene this dreame or not declared it to me and it is not unlike but that Ioseph used some such preparation as Daniel did when he was to expound Nebuchadnezzars dreame The dreame be to them that hate thee and the interpretation thereof to thine enemies Dan. 4.16 2. This hanging of malefactors upon a tree seemeth to have beene an ancient punishment and it was counted a most ignominious death and therefore Saint Paul setteth forth the great humilitie of Christ that humbled himselfe even to the death of the crosse Philip. 2. The Latine translator readeth he shall hang thee on the crosse which kinde of death was used also among the Romanes as Tully saith Facinus est vincire civem Romanum scelus verberare quid dicam in crucem tollerâ It is a great offence to binde a Citizen of Rome a greater to beat him the greatest to set him on the Crosse Cicer. Verrem 7. 3. Such as were hanged to death among the Israelites by the law were to be taken downe and buried the same day Deut. 21.23 But it seemeth that this use was not observed among the Gentiles but their bodies did hang to be meat to the fowles of the ayre Perer. which may be noted as a great judgement of God when the Lord suffereth his owne image in man to be so defaced and his flesh to be given for meat to the fowles and beasts whose flesh is appointed to be mans food as the Lord threatned against Ieroboam and his house that they which died in the Citie should be eaten of dogges they which died in the fields should be devoured of the fowles of heaven 1 King 14.11 Muscul. QUEST VII Whether lawfull to keepe the memorie of the birth-day Vers. 20. PHaraohs birth-day 1. This was a very ancient custome to celebrate the birth-daies of Kings and Princes both among the Medes and Persians as witnesseth Xenophon lib.
Ioseph with Calvin 2. Neither with some excuse this fact and say it was iocosum mendacium a pleasant lie or in sport 3. Much lesse was it a purposed lie as though Ioseph should sweare to it by the life of Pharaoh for by that oath hee affirmeth not that they are spies but bindeth them to bring their brother Benjamin 4. Wherefore I thinke rather that Ioseph used here no lie at all 1. But not in that sense as R Salomon taketh it as though Ioseph had called them spies one way because they searched the next way into the land of Egypt out of Canaan and that they understood Ioseph another way for Ioseph expoundeth himselfe that he meaneth spies properly that they came to see the weakenesse of the land 2. Neither doth he speake in the opinion of others that they are counted spies but this thrice urging of that word sheweth that he spake as from his owne judgement 3. Neither doth he speake figuratively turning his finger to himselfe and that they spied out his weakenesse and abused his youth and simplicity when they sold him to the Ismaelites as Rupertus 4. But I rather thinke that Ioseph thrice spake not assertive by way of assertion or affirmation but probative and tentative by way of question to trie them which was no lie nor dissimulation at all as neither was that in our Saviour that to make triall of his disciples humanity made shew as though he would have gone further Luke 24. QUEST VIII Whether Ioseph had before forgotten his dreames Vers. 9. ANd Ioseph remembred the dreames which he dreamed of them 1. Not that Ioseph had either made small account before of his dreames seeing the contrary event in his imprisonment and other afflictions 2. Or that prosperity had made him to forget his former visions 3. But now when he saw his dreames to take effect he doth more lively remember them better understandeth them than before as it is said of the disciples that they understood not those things which were said of Christ at the first but after hee was glorified then they remembred that they were written of him Iohn 12.16 Calvin QUEST IX Whether Ioseph sweareth by the life of Pharaoh or therein did wel Vers. 15. BY the life of Pharaoh you shall not goe hence First some excuse Ioseph here admitting this to be an oath 1. Because in effect he did sweare by God who was the author of Pharaohs health and life 2. Some againe doe extenuate his oath that he sware in effect by nothing as Socrates used to sweare by a goose or dog Zeno by the Caper tree to shew the vanity of the heathen that used to sweare by their Gods but it is not like that Iosâph set so light by the health of Pharaoh as Augustine well noteth an bono fideli servo vilis fuerit salus Pharaonis 3. Some would excuse it because Iâsâph was not in good earnest but did all this in a friendly kind of dissimulation but as it is not lawfull to lie in jest so much lesse to sweare in jest Secondly they that denie this to have beene an oath 1. Some say it was but a vehement kind of obtestation as Moses calleth heaven and earth to witnesse Deut. 30.19 and as a man may contest by his faith by his head and such like Calvin But yet this will not helpe for our Saviour condemneth whatsoever in our speech is used beside yea or nay Math. 5. that out of Deut. is a patheticall compellation of the creatures to be witnesse against the people of their ingratitude and disobedience which is much unlike this case here 2. Some hold this speech of Ioseph to be an execration as if he should say he wished Pharaoh no otherwise to live than he would doe as he said Thom. Aquinas But Ioseph was more reverent and respective of Pharaohs health and life 3. Iunius saith it is a constant kinde of affirmation used both among Christians and others and will have it like to those asseverations 1 Sam. 2 2â O my Lord Anna saith to Eli as thy soule liveth and Abner saith to Saul as thy soule liveth O king I cannot tell 1 Sam. 17.55 and as the use was to sweare by the soule of the Emperour as he alleageth out of Vlpianus But herein I cannot consent unto that learned man for in those phrases they alwayes either protested by themselves in the first person as 2 King 6.31 God do so to mee and more also or by those to whom they speake in the second person as in the examples given in instance and therefore the case is not all one with this And concerning that use to protest by the Emperous soule though it continued under Christian Emperors yet it is certaine that it was taken up before in the time of Idolatry when they ascribed divine honours to their Emperors 4. Wherefore I rather incline to thinke that this kind of speech to say by the life of Pharaoh was used commonly in Egypt as an oath partly of flattery partly of superstition in ascribing too much to their Kings which use they seeme to have derived from the Hebrewes that as they used to sweare vivit dominus the Lord liveth so they Pharaoh liveth and the Hebrewes write that to this day it is a law among the Egyptians that he which falsly sweareth by the kings head in a pecuniarie matter shall be put to death Perer. yea and the imperiall law is that he which did commit perjury swearing per genium Imperatoris by the soule or spirit of the Emperour should be beaten with clubs and it should be written over his head ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã sweare not rashly Iun. ex Vlpian But yet Ioseph in this place of purpose sweareth not but by the common use and custome spake as the rest did as it appeareth by his twice using of the same words together like as in our English tongue many suddenly will say Mary having no intent to sweare which notwithstanding at the first I thinke was taken up as an oath by the name of Marie And beside Ioseph doth conforme himselfe of purpose to the Egyptian phrase that his brethren should not suspect him to be an Hebrew which they might easily have done if he had said as the Lord liveth Therefore although Ioseph may be somewhat herein excused yet can he not be cleared or justified but that living among a superstitious people he was somewhat polluted also by their manners Mercer Genevens annot in the great Bible and so Iosephs brethren did take it that he charged them with an oath QUEST X. Whether Ioseph did forsweare himselfe Vers. 16. BY the life of Pharaoh yee are but spies It might seeme that Ioseph here did forsweare himselfe because they were indeed no spies 1. It doth not satisfie to say he did not forsweare because there is no mention made directly of God for though we ought onely to sweare by the name of God yet he that sweareth faâsly by any
Such things as went before as The occasion which was their grievous oppression in Egypt chap. 1. The preparation of the instruments of their deliverance of Moses chap. 2 3 4. and Aaron chap. 4. with their message to Pharaoh chap. 5 6. The meanes procuring their deliverance those ten severall plagues which were sent upon Egypt described from chap. 7. to chap. 12. 2. Their deliverance it selfe consisting of their Departure out of Egypt with the manner thereof and institution of the Passeover chap. 12. and their going forward in their journey c. 13. Their passing thorow the red sea with the destruction of the Egyptians chap. 14. Their thanksgiving chap. 15. â In the constitution of the Church is set forth 1. The provision of things necessarie for them as 1. Their foode chap. 16. and water for their thirst chap. 17. 2. Defence from their enemies as the Amalekites chap. 17. 3. A politike order set for government c. 18. 2. The prescription and promulgation of lawes Morall chap. 20. with the preparation thereunto chap. 19. Judiciall belonging to the policie of the Common-wealth chap. 21. to 24. Ceremoniall touching The sacred things of the Tabernacle chap. 25.27.30 The Tabernacle it selfe c. 26.27 The Ministers of the holy things the Priests and Levites Their institution with their holie garments chap. 28. Consecration ch 29. The workmen and instruments chap. 30. 3. The execution and practice of their people partly in Their disobedience to the Morall law in their apostasie and idolatrie chap. 32. with their reconciliation chap. 33.34 Their obedience concerning the ceremonials Of the people in bringing stuffe to make the Tabernacle and other holy things chap. 35.36 Of the workmen in making all things according to the patterne chap. 36. to 39. Moses in approving the worke chap. 39. and disposing it chap. 40. 3. Certaine generall questions out of the whole booke explaned QUEST I. Concerning the inscription of the booke THis booke is called in Hebrew of the first words velle shemoth that is and these are the names of the Greekes it is called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Exodus of the miraculous going of the Israelites out of Egypt Simler The inscription of the bookes of Scripture is of three sorts for it is taken either from the persons that wrote them as the bookes of Esay Ierem. c. or whereof they be written either in generall as the bookes of Ioshuah and of the Judges or in part as the bookes of Samuel or else from the things entreated of as the booke of Leviticus Numbers c. or of the first words of the booke as Genesis is called of the Hebrewes beresheth in the beginning Leviticus veââkra and he called c. which are the first words of the text and so also is this booke named as is said before Iun. and the reason of it may be this because where the writer of any booke of Scripture left it without name they of elder time for reverence and religion sake did forbeare to give it any title Simler QVEST. II. Of the computation of yeeres comprehended in the storie of Exodus COncerning the continuance of time and number of yeeres which are comprehended in this booke they are found to be 142. as may bee thus gathered From the death of Ioseph to the birth of Moses are yeeres 60. from the birth of Moses unto the departure of Israel out of Egypt are yeeres 80. chap. 7.7 from the departure of Israel thence unto the Tabernacle erected was one yeere chap. 40.17 Iun. These two latter numbers are certainly gathered out of the Scripture only the first may be doubted of which is thus also warranted all the time of the peregrination of Abraham and his seed in Egypt and Canaan maketh 430. yeeres Exod. 22.40 this time beginneth when Abraham was called out of his countrie and 30. yeeres was run at the birth of Isaack who at 60. begat Iacob Gen. 25.26 who at an 130. went downe into Egypt unto Ioseph Gen. 47.9 who being then 39. yeeres old and dying at an 110. Gen. 50.26 lived after that yeeres 71. then put hereunto 80. yeeres of Moses age all maketh joyning the summes of 30.60.130.71.80 together yeeres 371 there remaineth then the summe of 59. yeeres or 60. to make up the whole summe of 430. yeeres QUEST III. Whether Moses were the writer of this booke NOw that Moses was the pen-man and writer of this booke the spirit of God being the author and inspirer thereof it is diversly evident 1. for Moses testifieth of himselfe that he wrote all the words of the Lord Exod. 24.4 which are contained in this booke 2. The Scripture so divideth the bookes of the old Testament that they were written either by Moses or some other of the Prophets Luk. 16.31 3. Our Saviour alleaging a certaine place out of this booke doth call it the booke of Moses Mark 12. 26. Have you not read in the booke of Moses so also Luk. 20.37 And that the dead shall rise againe even Moses shewed it beside the bush when he said c. QUEST IV. Whether Moses Iudiciall lawes do now necessarily bind the Civill Magistrate BUt whereas in this booke divers both morall ceremoniall and Judiciall lawes are prescribed whereof the two first there is no question but that the one doth bind us still and the other is abrogated only concerning the Judicials of Moses it is controverted whether Christian Magistrates are bound to observe them which Judicials being of three sorts either such which are annexed to the Morall law as the punishment of adulterie and murther and disobedience to parents with death and such like or such as were appendant to the Ceremoniall law as the punishment of those that touched any dead thing or that came neere a woman in her monethly course and such like or such as belonged to the peculiar policie and state of that Common-wealth as concerning the yeere of Jubile the raising up of seed to the brother departed in marying his wife and such like of the two latter there is no doubt made but that the one is abrogated together with the ceremonies whereon they attended the other as proper to that government are now determined only the third kinde of Judicials remaineth about the which great question is made how farre Christian governours are obliged to the same For the discussing of which question 1. I neither am of their opinion which thinke that the Judiciall law is left to the libertie of the Christian Magistrate to adde to it and take from it and to alter it as shall âe thought fit for the time and manner of the countrey for this were 1. to be wiser than God to leave altogether those directions and rules of justice which he hath set downe and the Apostle saith the foolishnesse of God is wiser than men 1. Cor. 1.25 that which seemeth to be meanest of the Divine orders is farre beyond the wisest humane inventions 2. And there is but one Law-giver that
can save and destroy Iam 4.12 Onely God that gave unto man his life hath power to take it away and therefore otherwise than God hath given direction either by particular precept or generall rule the life of man is not to bee taken away 3. And seeing Magistrates are but Gods Ministers Rom. 13.4 they must execute justice according to his will for it is required of a disposer that he bee found faithfull 1. Cor. 4.2 but Gods will otherwise appeareth not than in his word 4. And seeing whatsoever is not of faith that is firme perswasion is sinne Rom. 14.23 and faith must be grounded upon the word as being wrought by the word Rom 10.17 how can the Magistrate approve his acts of justice as in the sight of God unlesse hee can warrant the same by the word 2. Neither yet can I consent with those which thinke that the punishment inflicted by Moses for the breach of the morall law together with the morall law is imposed upon Christian Magistrates as it is not lawfull to punish adulterie otherwise than by death nor simple theft by death but by restitution Piscator praefation in Exod. for if this were so then the Gospell should overthrow the policie and institution of divers Common-wealths which of a long time have continued but God is the author of peace not of confusion 1. Cor. 14.33 2. Mardoche and Daniel having place of government under the Persian Kings did no doubt minister justice according to the lawes of that countrey 3. Our Saviour Christ commanding to give tribute to Caesar and injoyning obedience to the higher powers which did beare the sword and that for conscience sake Rom. 13. seeme to give approbation to the lawes of nations maintaining right and tending to equity 4. Our Saviour himselfe observed not the judicials belonging to the morall law for whereas he that gathered stickes upon the Sabbath was stoned to death by Moses yet out Saviour excuseth and defendeth his Apostles who did as much as the other in rubbing the eares of corne for their necessity Matth. 12. yea hee giveth a rule that for fornication onely and adulterie it was lawfull for a man to put away his wife Matth. 19. which exception needed not if either in fact then or in right afterward adulterers and adulteresses were to bee punished by death If it be answered that Christ tooke not upon him the office of the Civill Magistrate to impose corporall punishment yet would not our Saviour have defended his Apostles nor yet by silence have left them unreproved for neglect of the law 3. Wherefore the best resolution is that the morall judicials of Moses do partly bind and partly are left free they do not hold affirmatively that we are tied to the same severity of punishment now which was inflicted then but negatively they doe hold that now the punishment of death should not be adjudged where sentence of death is not given by Moses Christian Magistrates ruling now under Christ the Prince of peace Isai. 9. that is of clemencie mercie may abate of the severitie of Moses law mitigate the punishment of death but they cannot adde unto it to make the burthen more heavie to shew more rigour than Moses becommeth not the Gospell to extend more favour is not unbeseeming of these two assertions my reasons are as followeth 1. That which Ambrose urgeth out of the mouth of Luke how our Saviour reproveth his Disciples because they would have had fire come downe upon the Samaritanes upon the which example hee thus inferreth Ostenditur nobis non semper in eos qui peecaverunt vindicandum quia nonnunquam amplius prodest clementia tibi ad patientiam lapso ad correctionem It is shewed us that alwayes vengeance is not to bee taken of those that offend because oftentimes clemencie is more profitable for patience in thee and amendement in the offender And this collection is ratified by the answer of our Saviour in that place The Sonne of man is not come to destroy mens lives but to sâve them Luk. 9.55 2. Augustine urgeth the example of Christ who suffered the woman taken in adââtery to escape without punishment of death Ioh. 8. Whereupon hee inferreth that the adulterâ ãâã not now to bee put to death but to live rather to be reconciled to her husband or to come ãâ¦ã the usuall answer is that our Saviour doth not here abrogate the Law against adultery ãâã only to meddle with the Magistrates office Piscator Ans. Neither doe wee say that Christ abrogateth that law but leaveth it free and taketh away the necessitie of it And though Christ exercised not the Magistrates office in his owne person yet in this case it had not beene impertinent to have given direction to have her before the Magistrate as in another case he sendeth the leper to the Priest Matth. 8.4 if it had pleased him to impose still the severitie of the law yea our Saviour sheweth by his answer Let him that is amongst you without sinne cast the first stone at her Ioh. 8.7 that hee would not have them such strait executors of the rigour of Moses law upon others but rather to bee severe judges of themselves and with charitable affection to support the frailty of others to the which themselves were subject 3. Further the difference betweene the times of the Law and of the Gospell must be considered then they received the spirit of bondage to feare but now the spirit of adoption Rom. 8.15 then they which came neere the mount where the morall Law was given were stone or stricken thorow with darts whether man or beast Heb. 12.20 but it is not so now then the bloud of Abel cryed for vengeance but the bloud of Christ now calleth for mercie and so speaketh better things than that of Abel Heb. 12.24 Therefore to mitigate the severitie of Moses Law in some cases yet not leaving sinne unpunished nor by connivence cherishing the same it is more sutable to the profession of the Gospell of peace and mercie Wherefore I here say with Chrysostome Vbi paterfamilias largus est dispensator non debet esse tenax Where the master of the house is bountifull the steward must not be sparing Melius est propter misericordiam rationem reddere quà m propter crudelitatem It is better to be called to account for too much pitie than for cruelty 4. The continuall practice of the Church sheweth as much that the rigour of Moses judicials is mitigated S. Paul willeth the incestuous man only to be excommunicate 1. Cor. 5. it seemeth then there was no law in force to put such to death nor in Cyprians time who thus writeth Quidam episcopi in nostro provincia c. Some Bishops in our province have altogether shut up penance against adulterie Nor after that in the time of the Eliberin Councell which was held under the reigne of Constantine where it was decreed can 9. Moechatus post
poenitentiam That he which committed adulterie after publike penance should finally be denied the Communion In Hieromes time it seemeth that adulterie was punished by death who in a certaine epistle maketh mention of a young man qui adulterâi insimulatus ad mortem trahitur who being accused of adultery was led forth to death yet Augustine as is shewed before reasoneth against it but of all other Origen writeth most plainly Apud Christianos si adulterium fuerit admissum c. Among Christians if adulterie be committed it is not commanded that the adulterer or adulteresse bee punished with corporall death c. neither therefore was the law cruell then neither now doth the Gospell seeme to bee dissolute but in them both the benignitie of God appeareth yet by a divers dispensation then by the death of the bodie the people was rather purged from their sinnes than condemned but unto us sinne is purged not by corporall punishment but by repentance and it is to be seene unto lest our punishment be greater whose vengeance is laid up for the next world when as they were absolved from their sinne by the paying of the punishment as the Apostle saith how much more punishment is he worthy of that treadeth under foote the Sonne of God Two reasons Origen yeeldeth of this his opinion that there is now a mitigation of the rigour of Moses law because then it served as an expiation of their sinnes prefiguring the death of Christ as S. Paul applieth that sentence Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree which is generally delivered by Moses to the particular death of Christ Galat. 3.13 but now the expiation of sinne is by repentance and remission of sinnes in Christ. Againe now a greater punishment abideth the contemners of the Gospell even eternall in the next world and therefore corporall death is not so much inflicted now for God punisheth not twice for the same thing as Origen in the same place alleageth Yet although we contend that the capitall punishment of Moses law may now be dispensed with in some cases upon the reasons before alleaged this is not either to condemne those Common-wealths which doe reteine still and practise the severity of Moses law against adulterers who therein sinne not but as Ambrose saith of the Apostles that asked for fire to come downe upon the Samaritanes Nec discipuli peccant legem sequentes Yet did not the Disciples offend following the law neither to excuse those places where this sinne is too easily and lightly punished as Erasmus complaineth in his time Nunc adulterium lusus magnatum est Now adulterie is but a sport of great men Where adulterie is not capitally punished yet great severity otherwise should be used as it was decreed in the Elibârin Councell that he which having a wife committed adulterie should be under penance five yeeres can ãâã He that did sinne that way after should not bee received to the peace of the Church till his dying ãâ¦ã that did commit adulterie after penance should never be restored to the communion of the Chuâââ c. 7. These or such like severe constitutions this wanton and lascivious age hath need of that this overflowing sinne might be kept in with higher bankes than now it is So then I conclude this point with Cyprian who speaking of divers kindes of Ecclesiasticall censure used in divers places thus writeth Manente concordia vinculo actum suum disponit dirigit unusquisque Episcopus c. The bond of amity remaining still every Bishop so directeth and disposeth his owne act that he is thereof to give account unto God The like may bee said of Princes and Magistrates in their dominions and regiments that the difference in publike punishments all intending the glorie of God and the brideling of sinne is no cause to breake peace or breede jelousie betweene Christian states Now for the other part that Moses Judicials doe bind negatively that is where Moses Law inflicteth not death there Christian Magistrates are not to punish with death the reasons are these 1. Because then the regiment of the Gospell should exceed in terror the strictnesse and severitie of Moses Law 2. God is that one Lawgiver that saveth life and destroyeth Iam. 4.12 he gave life and he only hath right to take it away God hath created man in his image Gen. 9.6 which image is expressed in mans soule animating the bodie This image then is not to be defaced and dissolved but by warrant and direction from God therefore the equitie of the Judicials of Moses ought to be a rule either by generall direction or particular president to all Magistrates in what cases and for what sinnes they are to deprive the offendors of their life But here it will be objected that if this be so then all those Common-wealths are in error which punish theft by death which by Moses law is satisfied by making restitution Exod. 22.2 Ans. Even by Moses law some kinde of theft received a capitall punishment as if it were a violent theft as it was lawfull to kill a theefe breaking into the house Exodâs 22.2 or a wanton theft as David judged him worthy to dye that having many sheepe of his owne tooke by violence the onely sheepe which his poore neighbour had 2. Sam. 12.5 Likewise publike theft and sacrilege in Achan was punished by death Iosh. 7. But that simple theft when a man stealeth only to satisfie his hungrie soule or to supply his present necessitie should be proceeded against to the losse of life it seemeth hard And as I take it the lawes of this land have used a good consideration herein that such small felons should escape by their booke wherein to my understanding greater clemencie and favour in some Judges were more commendable who require an exactnesse of such simple clerkes unlesse they bee such as are worthy for other former evill demerits to be cut off as rotten members There is a saying in the law Favores sunt ampliandi Where favour is intended it should be the largest way extended It were also to be wished that a greater valuation were yet set than of the usuall rate in such small fellonies when a man is to bee judged for his life By Dioclesians law some kindes of theft are charged with restitution of foure fold by another authentike law the theefe is adjudged to bee beaten with clubbes By the Decrees Qui fecârit furtum capitale c. Hee that committed any capitall theft as in breaking into an house in stealing a beast or some other thing of price if he were a Clergie man he was to be under penance seven yeeres if a lay man five if it were a small theft he was to make restitution and to doe penance one yeere By any of these or the like constitutions sufficient provision might be made against simple theft But it can no wayes be justified that such simple theft should bee more straightly
his stead in earth but the Godhead and name of God is simply and properly given unto Christ. 3. Cont. Ecclesiasticall persons subject to the civill magistrat FUrther though Aaron be Moses mouth and speake for him to the people yet Moses is made his superiour so though the Priests and Ministers doe declare unto the people the will of God and the law is to be required at their mouth yet are they subject to the Civill power as here Aaron to Moses Pellican as the Apostle saith Let every soule be subject to the higher powers Rom. 13.1 4. Cont. Against the baptisme of infants by women Vers. 25. ANd Zipporah tooke a sharpe knife This example is alleaged by the Romanists to prove the lawfulnesse of Baptisme by women in the case of necessity Bellar. lib. 1. de Bapt. cap. 7. Contra But this example cannot serve their turne 1. because the Minister of circumcision in the old Testament is not precisely appointed as the Minister of Baptisme is for the Levites and Priests were not specially charged by commandement to bee Ministers of circumcision but that charge did indifferently lie upon the masters of the family Gen. 17.9 But in the Gospell they are bid to baptise that are commanded to teach Mat. 28.20 Piscatoâ 2. The Romanists lay upon baptisme a necessity of salvation but here the necessity was not in respect of the infant uncircumcised but in regard of Moses and not a necessity of eternall salvation but of preserving the outward life Piscator 3. Zipporah did it in presence of Moses by this example they may allow women also to baptise in the presence of the lawfull Minister Simler 4. And though it pleased God to remit the temporall punishment upon this externall obedience yet this sheweth not that God did approve this act as before instance is given of the Samaritanes who were delivered from the Lions being but halfe worshippers of God 2. King 17. the Lord onely sheweth hereby that it is pleasing unto him that the externall discipline of the Church should be preserved Simler 5. This then being in it selfe an unlawfull act in Zipporah saving that necessity forced it and extraordinary it cannot be drawne to an ordinarie practice specially where there can bee no such necessity Iun. 6. This example rather sheweth that baptisme though by an unlawfull Minister is to be held to bee baptisme as after Zipporah had circumcised her sonne he was not circumcised againe then that such are to be allowed lawfull Ministers Heretikes are not fit Ministers of Baptisme yet if they keepe the true forme of Baptisme the Church useth not to baptise after them for as Augustine well saith That which is given ãâã be said not to be given although it may be rightly said not to be rightly given 5. Cont. That the punishment for the contempt of circumcision was not only temporall but in Gods justice eternall Vers. 24. THe Lord met him and would have killed him Bellarmine from hence would prove that the penalty of the neglect of circumcision was only temporall and consequently that circumcision had not to it annexed the promise of remission of sinnes and deliverance from eternall death as the Sacraments of the new Testament have lib 2. de effect sacrament cap. 17. Resp. 33. ad argum 1. Cont. 1. The penalty inflicted for the omission of circumcision is laid upon the party himselfe that is not circumcised even that person shall be cut off Gen. 17.4 therefore this example of punishment imposed upon the parent for the neglect of it in his sonne is not fitly urged to that end 2. that law is made against those that willingly neglect circumcision and so wilfully breake the Lords covenant but here is no contempt but only negligence and oversight 3. It followeth not Moses only should have beene temporally chasticed for this negligence therefore the neglect of circumcision was onely punished by temporall death like as God would have killed Aaron with temporall death for consenting to the Idolatry of Israel Deut. 9.20 Doth it therefore follow that the punishment of Idolatrie was only temporall God unto his servants remitted in mercie the eternall debt chastising them onely temporally for their owne amendment and the example of other 4. But that the contempt of circumcision deserved everlasting death in the justice of God appeareth both by the phrase that soule shall be cut off from his people which signifieth a finall perishing from the Church of God both in this world and in the next as it is taken Levit 20.3 that he which giveth his seed to Moloch shall bee cut off as also by the reason there given because hee hath broken the Lords covenant and cursed is every one which transgresseth any part of the law Deut. 27.26 And the curse of God is not only temporall but eternall 5. Further that circumcision had annexed to it a promise of grace and remission of sinnes the Apostle sheweth calling circumcision the seale of the righteousnesse of faith Rom. 4.11 and the outward circumcision represented the circumcision of the heart whose praise was not of men but of God Rom. 2.29 6. Cont. Against the necessity of Baptisme NEither can this example of Zipporahs necessary circumcision of her sonne bee fitly alleaged to prove an absolute necessity of baptisme an hypotheticall that is a conditionall necessity depending upon the precept of Christ wee graunt that it is necessary that baptisme both in generall should bee retained in the Church because Christ hath instituted it and in particular that every one should yeeld ready obedience thereunto as unto Christs ordinance when it may bee conveniently had but such a penall necessity as to imagine children dying without baptisme to bee excluded the kingdome of God cannot be admitted 1. This were to tye salvation unto the externall signe and so to limit the worke of the spirit 2. Some of the fathers indeed as Augustine held such a necessity but hee made the same necessity of the other Sacrament upon these words of our Saviour Ioh. 6.53 Except yee eat the flesh of the Sonne of man c. ye have no life in you c. Simler 3. There is not the like necessitie of baptisme now and of circumcision then for that was tied to the eight day so is not baptisme and the necessitie was not in respect of the infant but of the parent that neglected it as the child here was not in danger but Moses himselfe 6. Morall observations 1. Observ. That one standeth in need of anothers gifts Vers. 14. DOe not I know Aaron thy brother c. that he shall speake God could if it had pleased him have given unto Moses the gift of eloquence utterance but he rather joyneth Aaron as assistant unto Moses not giving all gifts unto one but so diverslie dispensing and disposing his graces that one may stand in need of another even as the members of the bodie cannot say one to another I have no need of thee 1 Cor. 12.21
the Sabbath which was the seventh day but it is taken for any festivall day of rest and may here bee translated the morrow after the rest Iun. because upon the first day of the pasch they were commanded to rest 5. This they did in presenting their first fruits unto God both for remembrance of that time when they came out of Egypt which was in the moneth Abib the moneth of new fruits as also to stirre them to bee thankfull unto God and to acknowledge him to be the giver and author of their abundance and plentie Pererius QUEST XXVI Whether the seventh day were more solemne than the first Vers. 16. ALso in the seventh day shall bee an holy assemblie Here the solemnitie of the first and seventh day seeme to be alike But Levit. 23.8 the Latine translator readeth thus Dies septimus erit celebrior sanctior The seventh day shall bee more solemne and holy Unto this objection divers answers are framed 1. It is called holier because this day is by speciall words called a day of restraint or of a solemne assemblie Deut. 16.8 Wherein it being the last day of the Feast there was a great assemblie of the people gathered together to praise God So in the same sense the last day of the Feast of Tabernacles is called the great day Ioh. 7.37 2. Others answer that it was greater not in comparison of the first day but of the other comming betweene Lyran. 3. But the best answer is that in the originall there is no degree of comparison but as it is said of the first day there shall be therein an holy convocation so it is said of the seventh Thââe shall bee an holy assemblie or convocation Perer. So here a question is moved questionlesse and needlesse 4. Now the reason why the first and the seventh day were more solemne than the rest may be this because on the first day of the Passeover they went out of Egypt and on the seventh day they passed through the red sea and these two dayes in remembrance of these two great benefits they kept with greater solemnitie this generally is the opinion of the Jewes and the reasons to confirme it may be these two first because as in the first day there was an holy convocation so also was there on the last when Moses and all Israel gave solemne thanks unto God Exod. 15. And beside the manner and order of their travell agreeth thereunto for on the 15. day they came to Succoth on the 17. to Ethom to Pi-hahiroth or the mouth of Chiroth on the 18. day there they staied where Pharaoh overtooke them the 20. and the night following they went over the red Sea Iunius QUEST XXVII Why the seventh day is called a day of restraint Deut. 16.8 BUt whereas it is said Deut. 16.8 on the seventh day of the paschall solemnitie shall be a restraint oâ solemne assemblie where the Latine translator readeth collecta there shall be a collection here ariseth a question about the meaning of these words 1. They which defend this translation some doe expound it of the collection which was made toward the expences of the temple Thomas But against this sense both Lyranus his reason may bee urged because the morrow after the pasch it was lawfull for the people to returne home Deut. 16.7 and therefore it is not like that collection was made after their departure as also Paulus Burgensis sheweth out of the sentence of the Hebrewes that collection was used to be made for the temple throughout all Palestina upon the first day of the twelfth moneth Pererius also alleageth that place 2 Chron. 7.8 that Salomon Fecit die octava collectam Made a collâction upon the eight day but saith he it is not like that so rich a King as Salomon made any collection of mony Therefore Pererius interpreteth it of the solemne collection and gathering together of the people upon that day to give God thanks solemnely and publikely for their mightie and glorious deliverance out of Egypt But all this businesse will soone be at an end if the vulgar Latine interpretation be refused as not so agreeable to the originall word which signifieth rather a restraint as even now shall be shewed 2. The Septuagint also are as wide which doe translate the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the going out because then the Feast was at an end but this is not the meaning of the word though it be true that then the people were dismissed as Salomon upon the eight solemne day of the Feast of Tabernacles sent away the people 1 King 8.66 having kept that day as a time of restraint 2 Chron. 7.7 at even he gave them leave to depart for so these places are reconciled 3. Therefore the meaning rather is that it was a time of restraint the people were kept and restrained from worke upon that day so the word ghatzer signifies to forbid or restraine Lyran. Montan. Iun. And though the first day also were a day of restraint wherein they were forbidden all worke save about their meat yet it seemeth that this was the greater day being the conclusion and determination of the Feast as these two are joyned together the last and great day of the Feast Iohn 7.37 as iâ shewed before QUEST XXVIII Why he which did not eat unleavened bread was to be cut off Vers. 19. THat soule shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel 1. Some doe expound this onely of the capitall punishment that such as neglected or contemned this observation of unleavened bread should be put to death and so is this phrase taken Exod. 30.33 and 31. vers 14. and in other places Simler Piscat But though it be not denied that in some places this phrase to bee cut off from Israel signifieth onely the taking away of the life of the offender as in the places given in instance yet alwayes it is not so taken for Genes 17.14 it signifieth the cutting off from the societie and the communion of the Saints both in this life and in the next as may appeare by the reason there given because he hath transgressed my covenant 2. Neither is it referred onely to the spirituall punishment as Osiander expoundeth this place by that of the Apostle that he which eateth and drinketh unworthily eateth and drinketh his owne damnation 1 Cor. 11.29 for under the law the punishment of death was used in the like transgressions in the contempt of the law as for violating the Sabbath 3. Therefore this sentence pronounced against such contemners includeth a penaltie both upon the bodie and the soule and of this strict severitie two reasons may be given the one from the authoritie of the law-maker God that gave us both bodies and soules and all other good things beside hath power to make lawes both to binde the bodie and the soule and the contempt of his Commandements is worthie of capitall punishment the other reason is taken from the constitution it selfe
and smoke by day and the shining of flaming fire by night c. and a covering shall be for a shadow in the day for the heate c. Isai. 4.5.6 QUEST XX. How this cloud differed from other clouds THis piller of the cloud was much differing from all other cloudes 1. In respect of the substance it was cleere and lightsome not darke and thicke as other cloudes are 2. It was in figure and shape as a piller the nether part thereof descending unto the Tabernacle the upper part reaching aloft unto heaven whereas other cloudes descend not as low as the earth 3. It alwayes kept this figure and fashion of a piller whereas other cloudes doe alter and vary in shape and appearance 4. This cloud moved of it selfe whereas other cloudes are moved by the wind and of themselves have no motion this way or that way but only as they ascend and goe up in vapors but this cloud both ascended and descended 5. Other cloudes are made of naturall causes as of vapors and exhalations but this cloud was raised by the Lord beside the ordinarie course of nature 6. The effects were divers for other cloudes are apt to engender raine and drop downe moisture but this was not ordained for that end but to shew them the way in going before them 7. This cloud differed in motion from all other cloudes for they are carried all one way with the wind this sometime went forward when the camp removed sometime it came backe and stood upon the Tabernacle it went sometime to the right hand sometime to the left according as the journies of the people were appointed out 8. The motion of it was alwayes certaine it went before the campe as they were able to endure to follow whereas other cloudes are carried swiftly that they cannot bee followed 9. The situation of it was divers not carried aloft as other cloudes which can be no direction to leade a man in his journey but this cloud was of such equall distance as it did part out their way before them like as the starre that guided the Wise men appeared below in the aire to conduct them Matth. 2.10 Lastly whereas other cloudes are not durable but are soone dissipated and dissolved by the wind and weather this cloud remained firme and so continued for the space of 40. yeeres Ex Perer. QUEST XXI· When the cloud began first to appeare BUt concerning the time of the first and last appearing of this cloud it is not like as Hierome thinketh that it went not before them till they came unto the third station in Etham because mention is first made of it there 1. For they had need as well before of a guide to direct them the way as afterward and therefore it is like that they had this direction in their first setting forth out of Egypt 2. As it is in the Psalm He made his people to goe out like sheepe and led them in the wildernesse like a flocke Psal. 78.52 where the Prophet alludeth unto the fashion of those countries where the shepheard goeth before and the sheepe follow after as our Saviour saith in the parable Ioh. 10.27 So the Lord went before his people as a shepheard in the cloudy and fierie piller even when he brought them out of Egypt 3. The Prophet Esây also alluding unto this cloud saith That upon every place of mount Sion and the assemblies thereof shall be a cloud Esay 4.5 So that hence it may be gathered that the Israelites in every place and in all their assemblies and campes had the presence of this cloud 4. Then like as the Wise men saw the starre that brought them to Christ in the beginning of their journey as they say Wee have seene his starre in the East and are come to worship him Matth. 2.2 they first saw the starre and then came forth so it may bee thought that the Israelites saw this cloud in their first setting forth 5. The people had need to have had all encouragement in their first going forth and to be animated in their journey and therefore it is like that the Lord did at the very first shew these comfortable signes of his presence QUEST XXII When the cloud and fiery piller ceased ANd as the cloud appeared not so late as Hierome supposeth so neither was it taken out of their sighâ so soone as the Hebrewes imagine for they say that after Aarons death who died on the first day of the first moneth in the 40. yeere after their departure out of Egypt Numb 33.38 the piller of the cloud and of the fire were no more seene and their reason is because that after that time no more mention is made of them Contra. First this is no sufficient reason for neither is there mention made of them a good while before 2. The words of the text are against their opinion for it is said That the Lord tooke not away the piller of the cloud by day nor the piller of fire by night from before the people Vers. 22. So then as long as they had need of this direction the Lord failed them not 3. Seeing the use of these pillers was to leade them the way that they might goe by day and by night it is like so long as they were in the way and travelled in the wildernesse they had the presence of the cloud the same cause remaining the meanes are like to have beene still continued But from the mount Hor where Aaron died untill they came to the plaine of Moab in the borders of the land of Canaan there were many solitary desert and waste places thorow the which they passed for divers of their stations were yet behind as appeareth Numb 33. that they had after they came from Mount Hor eight severall stations therefore it may well bee gathered that as they had the direction of the cloud in their other stations so also in these Perer. 4. Then like as the starre left not the Wise men till it had brought them to the very house where the holy ãâã was Matth. 2. So we may judge that the cloud left not the Israelites till they came into the land of Canaan whither the Lord intended to bring them QUEST XXIII Of the foure great miracles which the Lord wrought for the people in the desert THis extraordinary leading of the people by the going before of the piller of the cloud and fire was one of the great miracles which the Lord wrought for his people in the desert for as foure things are chiefly necessary for those that travell strength and health of body foode rayment and a guide so the Lord in every one of these wrought wonderfully for them 1. Their feete did not swell for the ãâã of forty yeeres Deut. 8.4 And of all that great multitude there being not so few in all as 2000. thousand seeing the third part of this number even 600. thousand were fighting men above twenty yeere old there was not one feeble
their time of rest during this three dayes journey Perer. But when they removed from the wildernesse of Sinai they went three dayes together without any stay the Arke still going before them to find out a resting place Numb 10.13 till they came to Kibroth Hatavah which was their next mansion place Numb 33.16 The Lord still animating and strengthning his people to go forward Iunius The third manner of staying was when the cloud remained still upon the Tabernacle two or three dayes and then they pitched their tents and thus the cloud staied in 40. yeere not above 42. times for so many mansion or camping places they had as they are set downe Numb 33. 4. Now how to know when they were to pitch their tents Pererius conjectureth at it and giveth these three rules First if the cloud stayed about noone then they knew that it onely rested till they had refreshed themselves but if it staied in the afternoone before night that they journeyed no more that day they tooke it that then they were to stay there some while and so pitched their tents But if it made no stay till the evening they pitched no tents till the next morning and then if the cloud went not forward they then set up their tents These are onely Pererius conjectures and uncertaine And it otherwise may be gathered out of the Scripture that they did not pitch their tents till the cloud had staied two dayes at the least as we read Numb 9.20 When the cloud abode a few dayes in the Tabernacle they pitched their tents at the commandement of God and afterward vers 22. If the cloud tarried two dayes or a moneth or a yeere upon the Tabernacle the children of Israel pitched their tents It seemeth then by this that this was a rule unto them not to pitch their tents or settle their campe till after two dayes Beside they had Moses to give them direction also in this case when to encampe themselves who continually consulted with God 5. Now the manner of their removing was this when the cloud arose from the Tabernacle the Priests and Levites tooke up the Arke and carried it and when they went forward with the Arke Moses used this prayer Rise up O Lord and let thine enemies bee scattered and let them that hate thee flee before thee And when the Arke rested hee said Returne O Lord to the many thousands of Israel Numb 10.35 Hereunto the Prophet alludeth when hee saith The Lord shall arise and his enemies shall be scattered Perer. 6. This cloud began not onely now to appeare when they were come to their third mansion place in Etham as Hierome thinketh but straightway upon their setting forth from Ramesis though mention be made first of it here that proveth it not now first to have appeared as Moses is said first in this place to have taken Iosephs bones with him which was done notwithstanding at his first comming out of Egypt the Scripture observeth not alwayes the order of time in setting downe matters of historie but the coherence of the argument So neither did the cloud leave them at Aarons death as is the opinion of the Hebrewes for seven moneths after Aarons death who died in the fift moneth immediatly before Moses death when Iosuah was consecrated to succeed him mention is made of the piller of the cloud wherein the Lord appeared to Moses Deut. 31.15 See more of this quest 22. before 7. Gregorie maketh the appearing of the bright cloud by day a signe of Gods favour and mercie to his obedient people and the appearing of the terrible fire by night as a signe of his severitie and justice against the wicked and unbeleevers Gregor hom 21. in Evangel Ex Perer. 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. Of the lawfull use of ceremonies Vers. 9. THis shall be as a signe unto thee upon thine hand c. As this place sheweth that there were then in the Church and so are still commendable ceremonies which the Lord hath instituted to be ââmembrances of spirituall things as these were of their deliverance out of Egypt so their superstition is reproved that dwell in the externall ceremony not looking unto the spirituall sense Ferus as the Pharisies did which did weare their phylacteries and fringes yet forgot the law represented and signified by them 2. Doct. Christ the Mediatour both of the old and new Testament Vers. 21. IEhovah went before them He that is here called Iehovah is chap. 14.19 called the Angell of God which was none other but Jesus Christ Iun. the Prince and Captaine of his Church the Mediatour both of the old and new Testament according as the Apostle saith Heb. 13.9 Iesus Christ yesterday and to day and the same also is for ever 3. Doct. Christ sheweth us the way to the heavenly Canaan as the piller did direct the Israelites toward their Canaan Vers. 22. THe Lord went before them by day in a piller of fire This piller divers wayes represented Christ 1. He is the piller and upholder of his Church 2. He leadeth us the way unto eternall life as he himselfe saith I am the way the truth and the life Ioh. 14. 3. Aperit nobis viam maris rubei id est gratiam baptismi sanguine suo rubentes He openeth to us the way of the red sea that is the grace of baptisme died red in his bloud Rupertus 4. Christ is both a fire and a cloud that is both God and man 5. In noctâ veteris testamenti paucis lucebat c. He did shine but to a few in the night of the old Testament as this fierie cloud gave light by night Ferus 6. But the most lively signification is this that Christ is that covering cloud under whose shadow wee are defended from the heate and stormes of temptation as the Prophet sheweth Isai. 4.6 Simler 5. Places of Confutation 1. Conf. Against the theatricall Pagean of the Masse Vers. 9. THey shall be a signe unto thee upon thine head These externall signets upon the head and frontlets betweene the eyes instituted at the first to a good end to put them in minde alwayes of the law of God they afterward superstitiously abused onely glorying in the outward ostentation of them so in Poperie the right use of the Supper of the Lord is turned into theatricum quândam actum Missa into a theatricall shew of the Masse calling men à communione ad spectaculum from the communion of the bodie and bloud of Christ to a gazing spectacle Simlerus 2. Conf. Against the adoration of reliques Vers. 19. MOses tooke the bones of Ioseph This maketh nothing for the adoration of the reliques of Saints which idolatrous use is still retained and practised in Poperie for Iosephs bones were carried to be buried they tooke up the bones of Saints and Martyrs after they have beene buried these were true bones they shew counters and ducks bones and such like trash for the bones of the Saints as hath beene found by
to have beene ten the first for want of water Exod. 17. the second likewise for water Numb 20. the third Exod. 14. when the Egyptians pursued them the fourth and fifth about Manna when they kept it till the morning and gathered it upon the Sabbath Exod. 16. The sixth murmuring was for flesh Exod. 16. and the seventh for flesh likewise Numb 11.4 The eighth for Moses absence when they made the golden Calfe the ninth when they tempted God in fighting against the Amalckites being forbidden Numb 14. The tenth upon the returne of the Spies which were sent to search the Land of Canaan Hieron dâ 10. tentationib But if all the murmurings of the Israelites be summed together they will bee found more than ten not fewer than twenty And they were of three sorts either generall of the whole congregation or speciall of some few or particular of some principall persons 1. Their generall murmurings were upon these occasions first for things which they endured as the increasing of their bondage in Egypt at the first comming of Moses Exod. 5.21 their feare to be all destroyed of the Egyptians chap. 14.11 their wearinesse of the way Numb 11.1 their biting by Serpents Numb 21. Secondly for things which they wanted as for sweet and potable water Exod. 15.24 for bread chap. 16.3 for water in Rephidim Exod. 17. for flesh Numb 11. for water againe when Moses also offended Numb 20. Thirdly they murmured and disobeyed when any thing was imposed them which they liked not as twiâe they were disobedient about Manna in reserving it till the morning chap. 16.19 and in gathering it upon the Sabbath chap. 16.28 where although their murmuring be not expressed yet this their refractary disobedience could not bee without murmuring So they rebelled in fighting against the Amalekites and Canaanites being forbidden Numb 14.41 Fourthly they murmured when their expectation was deceived as upon Moses long absence Exod. 32.1 when they heard a false report of Canaan that the inhabitants thereof were invincible Numb 14. when Core Dathan and Abiram with their adherents were suddenly destroyed Numb 16.41 These murmurings in all were sixteene 2. The second kind of murmuring was of some speciall men as Core Dathan and Abirain with two hundred and 50. persons murmured against Moses and Aaron Numb 16.3 The third kind was of some principall persons as of Aaron and Miriam against Moses Numb 12. Of Moses himselfe at the waters of strife Numb 20. of Aaron being discontent and so negligent in his office because of the death of his two sonnes Nadab and Abihu Levit. 10.19 Here are foure more and unto these others by diligent observations may be added QUEST XXXIX Whether the wood had any vertue in it that Moses cast ânto the water 25. ANd he cried unto the Lord and the Lord shewed him a tree 1. The Hebrewes thinke that this tree had no vertue at all in it to make the waters sweet but rather the contrary but that God would therein shew his power in healing one contrary by another as Elizeus did heale the waters by casting in of salt which was more like to have made them more bitter and our Saviour anointed the eyes of the blinde with clay and spittle which was an unlike thing to heale them 2. But it is more probable that there was some vertue in this wood to season and relish the water because it is said that the Lord shewed him or as the Hebrew word signifieth taught him the tree Tanquam tale jam liguâââoc esseâ quo posset hoc fieri As though it were such a kinde of wood as could doe this thing So Augustine reasoneth quaest 57. in Exod. to whom Calvinus and Simlerus consent for to what end else did the Lord direct Moses to that speciall tree more than to others unlesse we say that there were no trees there at all in the desert But the words will inferre another sense that seeing the Lord shewed him a tree there was a tree to be shewed as the Lord caused Hagar to see a fountaine not which newly sprung out of the ground but which was there before though she saw it not Gen. 21. The author of Ecclesiasticus chap. 38.5 affirmeth that there was vertue in the wood 3. But Iosephus is deceived who saith Moses fructum ligni accepit forte ibi jacens That Moses tooke a peece of wood lying there by chance whereas the Lord shewed it him and he further addeth that Moses did not cast in the wood because the people asked what it should doe but caused a great part of the water to bee drawne out of the fountaine and so the residue became sweet but this is also directly contrary to the text QUEST XL. Wherein the miracle consisted of healing the waters NOw although there were some vertue in this wood to heale the waters yet it was done not without a great mâracle 1. Which consisted not herein because the Lord Ostendit et lignum ubi nullum erat Shewed him a tree where none was for this is confuted before 2. Neither Quâa in tali natura ligni Creator demonstrator lââdandus est Because the Creator and shewer is to be praised in giving such a nature to the wood as Augustine in the same place for if the nature of the wood had done it it had not beene miraculous 3. But herein was the miracle that by the meanes of so small a peece of wood such a deale of water was changed as served such a great multitude Calvin And that it was suddenly and presently changed Simler And the waters were but made sweet only for that time and afterward returned to their bitter nature againe as Pliny before alleaged maketh mention of bitter waters there Iun. QUEST XLI Why the Lord used this meane in healing of the waters GOd could have healed the waters if it had pleased him without this tree But it pleased him to use this meanes for these causes 1. To teach us that we should not neglect the meanes which God appointed So the Lord divided the red sea and dried the way by a strong East winde Ezechias was healed by a lumpe of figges So God instructeth men and begetteth them to the faith by the ministery of men Simler 2. God hereby also reproveth their distrust and diffidence shewing Multa sibi in promptu esse remedia quibusque malis That he hath many remedies in store for whatsoever evils Calvin 3. Hoc medio uti voluit propter mysterium He would use this meane because of the mystery Ferus QUEST XLII Of the mysticall signification of this tree NOw what mystery is signified in this tree that sweetned the waters shall bee shewed in a word 1. Some by the bitter waters doe understand the killing letter of the Law which is impotable and unpleasant but being qualified by the Gospell Iam dulcââ erit litera The letter of the Law becommeth pleasant Ferus 2. This tree was a figure of that rod which should come of the
much away Simler 4. Now further it is to be observed that this 15. day of the second moneth when Manna was given was the same day which was prescribed for them to keepe the Passeover in that were uncleane Numb 9. signifying thus much that the true Manna was not given to the Jewes which observed the first legall pasch but to the Gentiles which were uncleane through their filthy Idolatry Christ the true Passeover was offered and this was the second pasch under the Gospell which succeeded the first pasch under the Law Ferus ex Gloss. ordinar QUEST III. Whether all the children of Israel murmured Vers. 2. ANd the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured 1. The word Lun here used signifieth to persist as also to murmure but the latter is more proper they persisted obstinate and opposed themselves by their murmuring against Moses and Aaron 2. It is like that there were some godly persons among them that murmured not as Caleb and Ioshua but because they were but few in respect of the rest all are said to have murmured Lyran. and even the Saints also are not without some infirmities Ferus 3. The whole congregation therefore is said to murmure both because it was generall throughout the campe and in regard of the manner they assembled tumultuously against Moses and Aaron and shewed their discontent Simler 4. It is added in the desert to shew the cause of their murmuring the place where they were was barren and dry and yeelded no hope of any succour or comfort Iun. And beside their wretched nature appeareth that being in such misery and distresse which should have stirred them to prayer they fell to murmuring Simler 5. This famine then which they endured was the more grievous in these three regards because all their provision which they had brought out of Egypt was spent and there was small hope of any new supply in that vast and barren desert and beside the multitude was so great that a little provision would not suffice Borrh. 6. So for this cause all the congregation is said to murmure both to include the Levites who also murmured with the rest and there were beside other strange people mingled with the Israelites who set them on worke to murmure as we reade Numb 11.4 Tostat. quaest 1. QUEST IV. How they are said to have murmured against Moses and Aaron here and afterward against the Lord. AGainst Aaron and Moses Yet afterward verse 8. they are said to have murmured not against them but against the Lord the reason is this 1. Because they were the servants and Ministers of God and he which murmureth against Gods Ministers contemneth God himselfe Genevens And Moses so saith Vt adversus illum se scirent murmurasse qui illos miserat That they should know that they had murmured against him who had sent them August quâst 59. in Exod. 2. They are said then to murmure against Moses and Aaron because their speech was directly against them and to them but in effect it was against the Lord because not Moses and Aaron but the Lord had brought them out of Egypt which the Israelites repented them of and were discontented with Lyran. and beside that which they murmured for the want of flesh and of bread Moses could not give them but God Thostat quaest 1. QUEST V. Of the grievous murmuring of the Israelites Vers. 3. O That we had died by the hand of the Lord c. These murmuring and obstinate Israelites doe diversly offend 1. In their ingratitude in extenuating the benefits which they had received upon every occasion they looke onely unto their present state and place where they were and thinke not of the place of bondage whence they were brought Pellic. 2. They preferre carnall things before spirituall the flesh-pots of Egypt before the glorious presence of God who now shewed himselfe visibly among them Ferus 3. They preferre their miserable bondage in Egypt with their grosse flesh-pots before their glorious liberty being in some want whereas men will even with the losse of their lives redeeme their liberty Marbach 4. Yea they untruly accuse Moses and Aaron as though they had brought them out for their destruction whereas they did therein nothing of their owne head but as the Lord directed them Ferus Pellican 5. Yea they call their glorious vocation from bondage to liberty a death and destruction Borrh. QUEST VI. How the Israelites are said to have fit by the flesh-pots of Egypt WHen we sate by the flesh pots 1. The word sir signifieth both a pot and a thorne because they used to hang their pots upon hookes of iron or wood like unto thornes and so the meaning is that they sate by the pot hangers whereon they used to hang their pots Oleaster 2. Some thinke this is spoken because they had flocks of cattell in Egypt whereof they might have fed if they would but they did rather use to eat of fish and fowle which they had there in abundance Gloss. ordinar 3. But though the Egyptians abstained from the flesh of bullocks and sheepe it is like the Israelites had their fill and their fitting by the flesh pots both noteth their security Lyran. and their carnall voracity and greedinesse Sedebant affectuoâe They sate gaping over the pots Tostat. They had cattell in the desert but if they should have eaten of them they might soone have killed them all up 4. But it is very like that they speake somewhat lavishly in the commendation of Egypt as Dathan and Abiram did call it a land that flowed with milke and hony Numb 16.13 of purpose to disgrace and diminish the true praise of the land of Canaan which indeed was the land that flowed with milke and hony 5. Some thinke further that they had no such store of cattell in the wildernesse because of the want of pasture oâ that they spared that kinde of flesh lest they should want for sacrifice but it is not like that this people had any such religious thought at this time therefore it is more probable that they longed not for such kinde of flesh which was at hand but for the flesh of fowles such as they used to eat in Egypt and they wanted now for the nature of discontented people is to loath such things as they have and to covet and desire that which they have not and in that the Lord giveth them quailes it seemeth hee satisfied their owne desire but to their further hurt in sending that kinde of flesh which they lusted after Sic fore Gloss. Ordinar QUEST VII In what sense the Lord saith he will raine bread from heaven Vers. 4. I Will cause bread to raine from heaven 1. Some thinke that by bread is understood generally any kinde of nourishment after the manner of the Hebrew phrase Gloss. ordinar Lyran. Oleaster But Augustines reason overthroweth this interpretation Nam isto nomine carnes complectuntur ipsa enim alimenta sunt for so also the flesh
doe as I counsell thee poteris aâdire pracepta Dei thou shalt have time to heare what God commandeth thee that is to consult with God which his leisure would not now permit him to doe Oleast Osiand 3. But this clause seemeth to depend of the first word âm if so that the meaning rather is this if God doe approve this my councell Iun. Wherein appeareth the piety of Iethro that would not obtrude his councell upon Moses no otherwise than it should have the divine approbation Simler Calvin QUEST XXIV In what sense the people are said to goe quietly to their place ANd all this people shalâ goe quietly to their place 1. Some take this to be the meaning that this order devised by Iethro was but to serve during the time of their travell but when they were come to their place that is to the land of Canaan then they should have Officers and Judges set in their Cities Ex Siml But Iethro in these words sheweth the present benefit which should redound unto them by this order both Moses should be eased of much labour and the people of their attendance 2. In these words therefore Iethro doth insinuate two things both that the people should dispatch their businesse whereas they were constrained before to goe home their controversies undecided because Moses was not at leasure to heare all and so they should goe home quietly Simler And againe they should not need to hang so long and give such attendance as they did Iun. For Moses should bee able to dispatch their greater causes which they brought unto him in time and their smaller controversies should be taken up at home Tostat. quast 8. QUEST XXV Whether these Officers were chosen by Moses Vers. 25. ANd Moses chose men 1. These Officers and Magistrates were taken out from the rest of the people by election so that the government of Israel was in respect of Moses Monarchicall for the supreme authority still remained in him but in respect of these inferiour Magistrates it was Aristocraticall which forme of government is so called because the best and most worthy are elected to rule and governe 2. Moses is said to have chosen them because he coÌnfirmed the peoples choice and admitted those whom they presented for so hee said unto the people Bring you men of wisdome c. and I will make them Rulers over you Deut. 1.13 For it was the safest way for the people to make choice of them because they were better knowne unto them and they would the more willingly obey them Tostat quaest 9. 3. Further whereas Moses saith Deut. 1.8 I am not able to beare you my selfe alone as though Moses himselfe first thought of this device it must be understood that after Iethro had given this councell unto Moses then he propounded it unto the people Genevens QUEST XXVI Whether these Officers were of equall authority or one subordinate to another Vers. 25. ANd make them heads over the people 1. It is not like that these Officers whereof some were set over thousands some over hundreds some over fifties some over tennes that they had their severall distinct regiments so that they which were not under one Officer as under the Ruler over ten were not also under his superiour Officer that was set over fifty for then if they had beene all of equall authority this distinction needed not to have beene that some were Rulers of thousands some of hundreds c. But it had beene better for them all to have beene of one sort as all over hundreds or tens and againe if these Officers had not beene subordinate one under another that inconvenience should not have beene prevented which Iethro intended to deliver Moses of trouble for by these meanes if the people might not appeale from one Judge to a superiour a multitude of causes still should have beene devolved to Moses 2. Therefore it is resolved that these Officers were one under another the Ruler of ten under the Ruler of fifty and he under the Centurion and this also under the tribune or millenary Officer so that there was none of the people which was not subject to a Ruler of ten or tithing man to a Ruler of fifty a Ruler of an hundred and a Ruler over a thousand And this subordination served to two purposes both for the Officers themselves that if any controversie fell out among them it might bee ordered by the superiour Judge and if the people found themselves agreeved with their tithing men and inferiour Officers they might appeale for redresse to their superiour Judges And so the appeale ascended from the Ruler of ten to the Ruler of fifty from the Ruler of fifty to the Centurion and from him to the millenary Judge or Tribune and thus their causes were decided before they came at Moses only the hardest and most difficult matters were reserved for his hearing and from him there was no further appeale Tostat. quaest 11. QUEST XXVII Of the difference betweene these Officers and the 70. Elders Num. 10. FUrther it is here to be considered that this institution of Officers which was brought in by the councell and advice of Iethro was divers from that order of 70. Elders which was instituted afterward by the Lord Numb 10. For they differ both in order of time these were appointed before they came to Sinai the other after they removed thence and in number these were many no doubt divers thousands the other onely 70. Iethro gave the advice for the choice of the first but the Lord himselfe of the other Their office also and administration was divers the seventy were the Councell of State which consulted only of the publike affaires of the Kingdome the other attended upon the private causes and suits of the people This difference betweene the Senators and Counsellers of State and inferiour Judges was observed in all well ordered Common-wealths among the Athenians Lacedemonians Romans and is to be seene in our State This was the ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or Senate of the Jewes which at the first consisted indifferently of men taken out of all the tribes six out of each of the eleven tribes the Levites excepted and the other foure to make up 70. were supplied by Levites and Priests to direct the rest This indifferent choice out of all the tribes continued untill the time of the Kings when the choice of these Elders was overruled by their authority then after the captivity because of the prerogative of the tribe of Iudah to whom the principality of right appertained most of the Elders were taken out of that tribe and so it continued till Herod dissolved that honourable and grave Senate of the Elders making havocke of them and putting most of them to death Iun. ex Ioseph Analys in Num. cap. 11. QUEST XXVIII At what time Iethro tooke his leave of Moses Vers. 27. AFterward Moses let his father in law depart c. 1. Some thinke that Iethro neither came unto Moses in
for that heathenish conceit of the Philosopher that vertue is not properly said to be in women it is contrary to that position of the Apostle that in Christ there is neither male nor female Galath 3.28 the spirit of God can plant grace and vertue in the hearts of women as well as of men nay often the Lord chuseth the weake things of this world to confound the mighty things 1. Cor. 1.27 And the examples of so many vertuous and good women in the Scriptures of Sara Rebecca Anna the Shunamite and the rest in the old of Marie Anna Martha Lydia Dorcas and many other in the new Testament doe evidently confute that prophane paradox of the Philosopher 4. And to deliver the regiment of women from the Cardinals vile and impure slaunder this country and nation of ours as is hath found the government of a woman the worst in the late Marian persecutions when more good men and women Saints of God were put to death than in any three Kings reigne beside so have we seene it in the next change the best of all other Princes reignes that went before famous Queene Elizabeths government as for flourishing peace honourable fame and name enriching of the Land subduing of forraine enemies enacting of good lawes may be compared with the reigne of any former Kings So for the advancing of true religion increasing of learning propagating the Gospell none of her predecessors came neere her That as the refining of coine being reduced from base money to pure silver and gold was her honour in the Civill State so the purging of religion according to the purity of the word of God in the Church shall bee her everlasting fame in the world and is her eternall reward with God 4. Confut. That Christ shall have no Iudges under him at the latter day but shall be the only Iudge himselfe Vers. 22. LEt them judge all small causes Origen upon these words hath this private conceit Hanc sâguram Iudicum non solum in hoc seculo sed etiam in futuro servandam c. ãâã this forme of Iudges shall be observed not only in this world but in the next And then he alleageth that text Matth. 18.28 That when the Sonne of man shall sit in the throne of Majesty yee which have followed me in the regeneration shall sit upon twelve seats and judge the twelve tribes of Israel Whereupon he inferreth that Christ at the day of judgement shall appoint other Judges beside himselfe Qui judicent populum de mineribus causiâ c. Which shall judge the people in smaller causes referring the greater to him The Rhemisnis and Romanistes whose manner is to scrape all the refuse of the Fathers affirme likewise That the faithfull shall judge and give sentence with Christ at the latter day wresting the same text in Matthew to the same purpose Contra. 1. The Apostles and Saints are said indeed to judge the world but not in that sense as Christ is said to be the Judge of the world but as he saith his Word shall judge them at the latter day Ioh. 12.48 that is be a witnesse against them so the Word preached by the Saints in their life and their conversation following the same shall be a witnesse against the world and so their condemnation like as in the processe of judgement here in earth the evidence that is brought in and the witnesses produced are said to condemne the guilty partie and to judge them though the Judge only give sentence Thus Ambrose fitly expoundeth this phrase Iudicabunt Sancti hunc mundum quia exemplo fidei illorum perfidia mundi damnabitur The Saints shall judge the world because by example of their faith their perfidiousnesse shall be condemned 2. For otherwise if Christ should observe the same forme which Moses did to appoint coadjutors because he alone sufficed not this were to derogate from his all sufficient power who needeth not as man any assistants or fellow helpers Vers. 22. Every great matter let them bring to thee Upon this president the Romanistes would ground the papall reservation of cases from whom no appeale say they is to be made as there was not from Moses Tostat. quaest 11. in 18. cap. Exod. Contra. 1. There is great difference betweene the reservation of matters to Moses and of certaine cases to the Pope for Moses was set over but one nation which at this time encamped together within the compasse of not many miles and so they might with ease bring the weighty causes to him But the Pope challengeth to be the supreme Judge over all the world and so without infinite trouble the greater causes cannot be brought unto him 2. Moses judgement was sought for because hee could not erre having often conference with God to direct him as the Pope hath not and this Testatus confesseth Romanus pontifex c. The Roman Bishop though he have great power sometime is not a man very vertuous and though he be because he hath not God present to answer unto all his demands facilius errare potest he may more easily erre therefore that is but a foppish and fawning conclusion of the Canonists that the Pope hath Omnia jura in scrinio pectoris All lawes in his breast 3. Whereas Iethro intended in this device the peoples ease not to goe farre for their causes and Moses ability to performe his office neither of these inconveniences is helped in making appeales to Rome for neither is the Pope able to amend all such causes and the people would be infinitely molested to be hurried to Rome 4. And if it were not for the advantage of the Court and Consistory of Rome they would desire to bee eased rather of than cumbred with such appeales But Moses herein only sought the profit of Gods people not his owne Simler 6. Morall Observations 1. Obs. To take heed of idle and vaine talke Vers. 8. THen Moses told his father in law c. Moses did conferre with Iethro about the wondrous workes of God which the Lord had wrought for them Vnde arguuntur hi qui vanis colloquiis delectantur They then are reproved which are delighted with vaine talke Ferus Which may serve as a good motive in our dayes to cut off idle if not very prophane conference when wee meet remembring ever that of idle words we must give an account B. Babington 2. Observ. Workes must be joyned with faith Vers. 12. THen Iethro tooke burnt offerings c. Having beene thankfull in words now he addeth deeds for S. Iames calleth that a dead faith where workes want if we joyne both these together as Iethro did we shall fully give assurance both to others and to our selves of our true faith B. Babington 3. Obs. That we should doe all our workes as in Gods sight Vers. 12. THey came to eat bread with Moses father in law before God Hereupon Origen well noteth Sancti manducant bibunt in conspectu Dei c. The
morall and ceremoniall lawes So that these Judicials were the very bond of the other lawes and kept the people in order and obedience Vrsinus Catech. 2. These lawes doe thus differ 1. The Morall are generall grounded upon the law of nature so are not the other 2. They are perpetuall to endure for ever so doe not the other 3. The Morals require both externall and internall obedience the other onely externall The Morall were the principall and other lawes were to give place unto them and they were the end unto the which the other tended Vrsin 3. Yet these three the Morall Judiciall and Ceremoniall are not severally but joyntly handled by Moses so that among the Morals there are found some Ceremonials and among the Judicials both Morall and Ceremoniall lawes Lyran. And the Moral law contained in the ten Commandements was delivered by the Lords owne voice to the people the rest they received by Moses from God Tostat. quest 1. QUEST III. Of the validity of the lawes Morall Ceremoniall Iudiciall which are abrogated which are not COncerning the validity of these lawes 1. The Ceremonials are utterly abolished so that there is now no place for them under the Gospell neither can they be revived without derogation to the Gospell of Christ as the Apostle saith If yee be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing Galath 5.2 for when the body is come the shadowes must be abolished but the ceremonies were shadowes the body is Christ Coloss. 2.17 Their Temple signified the Church of God their holy place heaven their sacrifices the passion of Christ their expiations the remission of sinnes these things then being fully exhibited and fulfilled in Christ have now no more place in the Church Ferus Againe the ceremonies served only for that carnall people which were as children kept in bondage under the elements and rudiments of the world Galath 4.3 But now we are no longer under tutors and governours the time appointed of the Father being expired but are set free and redeemed by Christ. Ferus Another reason of the abolishing of them is in respect of that people to whom they were prescribed as a marke and cognizance to discerne them from all other nations but now this distinction being taken away and the wall of partition being broken downe both Jew and Gentile being made all one in Christ that also is abolished which discerned them from other people for the causes being changed for the which the law was made there must needs follow also an alteration of the law it selfe Vrsin 2. The Judicials are neither abolished nor yet with such necessity injoyned the equity of them bindeth but not the like strict severity as is shewed before at large in the generall questions prefixed before the first chapter whither I referre the Reader 3. The Morall law remaineth full in force still and is not abrogated Quoad obedientiam in respect of obedience which thereunto is still required now under the Gospell Sed quoad maledictionem but in respect of the curse and malediction which Christ hath taken away So that it is most true which our blessed Saviour saith he came not to dissolve the law but to fulfill it Matth. 5. Hee hath fulfilled it 1. In his owne person in keeping it 2. In paying the punishment for us which was due by the law to the transgressors thereof 3. In enabling us by his grace to walke in obedience to the law Vrsin QUEST IV. Of the difference betweene the Morall and Evangelicall law BUt though the Morall law bee now in force and bind us to obedience as well as it did the Jewes yet there is great difference betweene the law and the Gospell 1. In the knowledge and manifestation thereof for to the Morall law wee have some direction by the light of nature but the knowledge of faith in Christ by the Gospell is revealed by grace 2. The law teacheth what we should be by faith and grace in Christ we are made that which the law prescribeth and the Gospell effecteth in us 3. The conditions are unlike the law tieth the promise of eternall life to the condition of fulfilling the law in our selves the Gospell to the condition of faith apprehending the righteousnesse of Christ. 4. The effects are divers the law worketh terrour the Gospell peace and comfort Vrsin The law revealeth sinne the Gospell giveth remission of sinnes Ferus So that the one is lex timoris the law of feare the other is lex amoris the law of love which also hath a threefold difference yet further 1. Lex timoris facit observantes servos the law of feare maketh the observers thereof servile but the law of love maketh them free 2. The law of feare is not willingly kept but by constraint the law of love voluntariò observatur is willingly observed and kept 3. The one is hard and heavy the other easie and light Tom. opuscul 8. QUEST V. Of the manifold use of the law in the fourefold state of man TOuching the use of the Morall law it is to be considered according to these foure states of man as he was in his creation and state of innocency in his corrupt and decayed nature as hee is restored by grace and as he shall be in the state of glorification 1. Man in his innocency received two benefits by the knowledge of the law which was graft in him by creation that thereby hee was made conformable to the image of God and so directed that he should not have swarved from the will of the Creator and beside he thereby had assurance so long as he walked in obedience of certaine eternity never to have tasted of death corruption or mutability in his state for he that keepeth the law shall live thereby Vrsin 2. In mans corrupt state the law serveth both to restraine the evill and therefore the Apostle saith that the law is not given to a righteous man but to the lawlesse and disobedient 1. Tim. 1.9 as also to discover unto them their sinnes for by the law commeth the knowledge of sinne and therefore the Apostle saith Without the law sinne is dead Rom. 7.9 that is it is not knowne to be sinne Ferus 3. In man regenerate the law is a rule of righteousnesse and a lanterne to their feet as David saith 2. It teacheth the true knowledge of God 3. It assureth a man that walketh therein of his election 2. Pet. 1.10 If ye doe these things yee shall never fall 4. It sheweth what benefit wee have received by Christ the renuing of that image wherein man was first created Coloss. 3.10 5. In the state of glorification the law shall have that use which it had before mans fall to shew the conformity in those glorified creatures in their holy obedience with the blessed will of their glorious Creator Vrsin QUEST VI. Why it pleased God now and not before to give his written law to the world IT followeth now to bee considered why it pleased God to give
and terror love and feare for a Fountaine cannot make both salt water and sweet Iam. 3.12 But the law is the minister of death of feare and terror Ergo not of life and peace and so consequently not of the faith of the Gospell which bringeth all these 3. The same thing doth not both make the wound and give a plaister to heale it The law doth shew us our sinne faith by grace in Christ healeth it the law reviveth sinne Without the law sinne is dead Rom. 7.8 but we are dead to sinne and alive to God in Iesus Christ our Lord Rom. 6.11 The same cannot make us both to die unto sinne and revive sinne the law doth the one therefore not the other So Augustine saith Ad hoc data est lex ut vulnera ostenderet peccatorum qua gratiae benedictione sanaret Therefore was the law given that it should shew the wounds of our sinnes which it should heale by the benediction of grace August de poenitent medic 4. The Preachers publishers and givers of the law and Gospell are divers The law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Iesus Christ Ioh. 1.17 But if justifying faith were commanded in the law then grace also should come by the ministrie of Moses that gave the law This is Bernards reason who further inferreth thus Venit prâinde gratia plenus veritate Dominus noster c. Therefore Christ our Lord came full of grace and truth that what could not bee done by the law might bee fulfilled by grace Serm. parâ 28. 5. The qualities and conditions of the law and the Gospell are divers the law promiseth life to him that worketh Moses thus describeth the righteousnesse of the law That the man which doth these things shall live thereby Rom. 10.5 But the Gospell requireth not the condition of working but beleeving to him that worketh not but beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousnesse Rom. 4.5 If then faith were commanded in the law to beleeve should also be a worke of the law then the Apostles conclusion were in vaine I conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law But if faith be excluded out of the works of the law then it is not commanded or contained in the law for then it should be a worke of the law 2. Further the invocation of Angels and Saints which is commonly practised and stifly maintained in the Church of Rome is another apparent transgression of this first commandement because they give a speciall part of the divine worship which consisteth in prayer and invocation unto the creature First we will see and examine the arguments produced by the Romanists in defence of this superstition and then by other reasons out of the Scriptures convince and confute them The Romanists Arguments answered brought in defence of the invocation of Saints 1. THe Saints doe pray for us therefore we may and ought to pray them The antecedent or first part that the Saints doe pray for us they would prove by these places of Scripture Exod. 32.13 Moses thus saith in his prayer Remember Abraham Izhak and Iakob thy servants c. Ierem. 15.1 Though Moses and Samuel stood before me yet could not my affection be toward this people Baruch 3.4 O Lord God almightie heare now the prayer of the dead Israelites 2 Macchab. 14.15 And Onias spake and said This is a lover of the brethren who prayeth much for the peoplâ to wit Ieremias the Prophet of the Lord. Answ. 1. As for the testimonies cited out of Baruch and the booke of Macchabees they prove nothing because they are no books of Canonicall Scripture 2. The other testimonies are impertinently alleaged for in the first Moses maketh no mention of the prayers which Abraham Izhak and Iakob should make for the people but of the covenant which the Lord made with them In the other of an hypotheticall and conditionall proposition they make a categoricall and absolute affirmation The text is If Moses and Samuel stood they inferre that Moses and Samuel did stand Simler But it may better be answered that if these were alive among the people to stand before the Lord for them in prayer c. as see the like Ezech. 14.14 Though these three men Noah Daniel and Iob were among them they should deliver but their owne soules by their righteousnesse 3. The Saints doe pray unto God by their generall wishes and desires as wishing that the Kingdome of God were accomplished as Revel 6.10 The soules under the Altar crie with a loud voyce saying How long Lord c. doest thou not judge and avenge our bloud But our particular necessities they are ignorant of and so doe noâ make particular requests for us therefore the argument followeth not they pray by their generall desires for the Church Ergo they pray for us in particular 4. Seeing that the Romanists doe hold that the Patriarks and Fathers of the old Testament were in Limbo which they make a member or part of hell they doe contradict themselves in making them mediatours and intercessours in heaven 2. Argum. The Angels they say know our affaires and pray for us As Zachar. 1.12 The Angell of Iehovah answered and said O Lord of hosts how long wilt thou bee unmercifull to Ierusalem c. Therefore it is lawfull to pray to the Angels Answ. 1. That the Angels doe report our affaires unto God and so may make relation of our prayers and words also as of our other gests and acts unto God as the Lords messengers and ministers we will not denie but that they make any particular requests for men the Scripture no where speaketh and we are not bound to beleeve the relation of our prayers unto God is one thing and mediation and intercession is another 2. That Angell of Iehovah which prayed for Jerusalem was the Lord Christ who maketh intercession for his Church unto whom the rest of the Angels returne their message vers 11. who is also called Iehovah vers 20. 3. Neither doth it follow if it could bee proved out of Scripture that the Angels prayed foâ us that we are to pray to them because they are not alwayes present to heare us and we are forbidden in Scripture to worship them Revel 22.9 and therefore to pray unto them which is a part of divine worship 3. Argum. The Saints that are living doe one pray for another much more the Saints being dead because their charitie is more perfect and seeing there is a communion of Saints as of the living so also of the dead which communion being not in faith and hope whereof there is no more use with them that are at rest it remaineth it is in charitie As therefore we may request the living to pray for us so we may pray the dead also to entreate for us Answer 1. The argument followeth not for the Saints alive doe one know anothers necessitie so do not the
that doth evill 3. To provide by other holesome positive lawes agreeable to the times and places to governe the people in all equity as it is said in the Proverbs By ãâã Kings reigne and decree justice Prov. 8. vers 15. Contrary hereunto are first negligence in government either in not prescribing good lawes to the people as the Kings of Judah offended herein that removed not the hill Altars or in not defending the innocent as Ahab suffered Iezabel to put innocent Naboth to death or in not punishing the transgressors of Gods law at all or not according to the quality of their sinne as Eli failed herein in being remisse toward his sonnes being then the Judge of Israel 2. Tyranny either in commanding unjust things as Saul did to his servants to kill David in his owne house 1. Sam. 19.11 or in sparing to punish the offenders as Saul in saving Agag alive 1. Sam. 15. or in punishing beyond the quality of the offence as Saul did for a small or no offence put the Priests to death 1. Sam. 22. 3. Pastors and Teachers are also spirituall fathers whose office is 1. Faithfully and diligently to teach the people found doctrine as S. Paul saith I kept backe nothing that was profitable but have shewed you and taught you openly and throughout every house Act. 20.20 2. To exercise with a fatherly clemency the discipline of the Church as S. Paul did in excommunicating the incestuous young man 1. Cor. 5. Contrary hereunto are 1. Negligence in teaching 2. Then insufficiency to teach for such cannot discharge the duty of spirituall fathers both these are touched by the Prophet Isay 56.10 The watchmân are all blinde they have no knowledge they are all dumme dogs they cannot barke they lye and sleepe and delight in sleeping 3. Teaching of unsound and corrupt doctrine of such the Apostle saith If any man preach unto you otherwise than that which you have received let him be accursed Galath 1.9 4. The negligent administration of the Ecclesiasticall government as our Saviour reproveth the Scribes and Pharisies for wresting the Commandements of God to observe their owne traditions Mark 7.9 4. Masters are also fathers of their family and servants their duty is 1. To require of their servants such things as are equall and just and not beyond their power or strength Luk. 17.8 2. To provide for them food and raiment and other necessaries Prov. 31.21 Shee feareth not the snow for her family for all her family is cloathed with double 3. To governe the family and order them with discretion and to watch over them by domesticall discipline Prov. 31.27 She overseeth the wayes of her houshold and eateth not the bread of idlenesse Contrary hereunto are 1. To command hard and cruell service as Sampson being a servant to the Philistims was forced to grinde in the prison house Iudg. 16.21 2. To defraud them of provision or maintenance in sicknesse or in health as the Amalekite did which left the poore Egyptian being sicke in the field 1. Sam. 30.13 3. To be cruell and immoderate in correction unto them Balaam was reproved for his cruelty toward his beast a much greater fault it is for masters to bee too sharpe toward their servants 5. The elder sort and ancient must goe before the younger 1. In example of good life Prov. 16.31 Old age is a crowne of glory if it be found in the way of righteousnesse 2. In good counsell Iob 32.7 I said dayes shall speake and the multitude of yeeres shall teach wisdome Contrary hereunto are 1. Evill and light counsell in the elder sort wherein Iobs friends offended all but Elibu Iob 32. 2. Evill example in life and manners as Cham gave an evill example to Canaan his sonne in deriding his fathers nakednesse 3. Neglecting of the younger sort and letting them run their owne course without any admonition or direction as Gen. 19.4 both young and old in Sodome came together and beset Lots house Vrsin Duties peculiar to inferiours 1. HEre is required reverence both internall in acknowledging and approving the divine ordinance in appointing of superiours and testifying the same by externall obeisance as David reverenced and respected Saul because he was the Lords anointed his heart smote him for the cutting off the lap of Sauls garment he indured not to offer unto him the least indignity 2. Love must be joyned with reverence for one cannot truly and heartily reverence those whom they love not As S. Paul testifieth of the Galathians that if it had beene possible they would have plucked out their owne eyes and given them unto him Galath 4.15 3. Obedience must be yeelded in all lawfull things and that willingly as S. Paul would have servants obedient to their masters in singlenesse of heart as unto Christ Ephes. 6.5 4. Thankfulnesse for benefits received from the superiours as the Egyptians said unto Ioseph Thoâ hast saved our lives Gen. 27.25 5. We must also beare with the infirmities of superiours such as may be tolerated without Gods dishonour and directly impugne not the law of God as Ecclesiasticus well admonisheth chap. 3.13 My sonne helpe thy father in his age c. and if his understanding faile have patience with him and despise him not when thou art in thy full strength Contrary hereunto are 1. Not to yeeld due reverence unto superiours in word or in deed as therefore S. Paul excused himselfe by his ignorance because he had called the high Priest painted wall Act. 23. 2. To hate them especially in respect of their office as the Witch at Endor hated Saul for expelling of Witches and Southsayers 1. Sam. 28.9 Or to love them more than God and to extoll them above their desert as the people that said Herods voice was the voice of God and not of man Act. 12. 3. To refuse to obey them in lawfull things as the Reubenites refused to goe with Deborah and Baruch to battell Iudg. 5.15 Or to obey only in shew as the sonne that said he would goe worke in his fathers vineyard and did not Matth. 21.30 Or in rebelling against them as Abshalom did against his father or in obeying them in things unlawfull as Doeg at Sauls commandement killed the Priests or in refusing to helpe and aid them as the men of Succoth refused to give bread unto Gedeons army Iudg. 8. 4. To be unthankfull unto them is another transgression as Pharaohs Butler was unto Ioseph that was his keeper and comforter in prison Genes 40. 5. And to lay open their infirmities not hiding and covering them as Cham did his fathers nakednesse Genes 9. or to flatter them as Tertullus the Orator commended Felix government beyond his desert Act. 24.3 Duties common both to Superiours and Inferiours 1. Here is commanded generally in all justice and prudence to give and yeeld unto every man that which belongeth to his place as when S. Paul had described the duty of servants toward their masters he saith likewise unto Masters
yea the land it selfe is polluted and defiled with bloud Numb 35.36 Galas 6. Mans bodie is the temple of the holy Ghost 1 Cor. 6.16 If any then destroy the temple of God him will God destroy 1 Cor. 3.17 7. The murtherer also sinneth against Christ whose member his neighbour is whose life hee hath sought So reasoneth the Apostle but in a divers case that he which causeth the weake brother to perish for whom Christ died sinneth against Christ himselfe 1 Cor. 8.11 QUEST XI How diversly murder is committed THis kinde of externall and actuall murther is committed two wayes either by a man himselfe or by another 1. The first is done two wayes either by the cruell shedding of mans bloud which is the most grievous sinne of all or by neglecting the meanes and not preserving our neighbours life either by helpe or counsell when it is in our power as the rich man suffered Lazarus for want of reliefe to perish at his gate Luk. 16. So the Priest and Levite passed by the man that had beene wounded of the theeves and was left for halfe dead and had no compassion of him Luk. 10. So the Wise-man saith in the Proverbs chap. 24.11 Deliver them that are drawne to death and wilt thou not preserve them that are led to bee slaine Isidore saith Qui incurrit in nudum esurientem c. He that meeteth with a man readie to perish for hunger and cold if he doe not give him meat and raiment homicida tenebitur shall be counted a murtherer So Gloss. interlinear A man committeth murther manu vel mente vel subtrahendo auxilium aut consilium c. with his hand with his heart and when he withdraweth his helpe and counsell 2. A man killeth by another two wayes consensu by giving consent as Saul did when Stephen was put to death keeping their garments that stoned him Act. 7.58 And the people crucified Christ calling unto Pilate Crucifie him Mandato voluntate By willing and commanding ones death as David did contrive Vrias death and Iezabel Naboths Bastingius QUEST XII Of the divers kinds of murder THere are divers kinds of killing 1. There is a lawfull killing or taking away of the life by the Magistrate as either in putting malefactors to death or in just warre where much bloud is shed 2. There is another kinde altogether unlawfull and inexcusable which is called wilfull murther when any of hatred smiteth a man that he die or of purpose lie in wait for him Numb 35.20 So Ioab wilfully killed Abner and Amasa 3. There is a third kinde of involuntarie murther when a man lieth not in wait but God offereth him unto him Exod. 21.13 For though such things seeme to us to fall out by chance yet all things are ordered and disposed by Gods providence and with him nothing happeneth by chance of this kinde there are three sorts 1. When two doe of a sudden having no purpose before fight together and the one killeth the other as striving upon the way or falling out upon any other sudden and unthought of occasion this is called manslaughter as Abner killed Asahel that met him and pursued him in battell this kinde is not so hainous as wilfull murther yet it far exceedeth these other kinds that follow 2. Sometime one is killed by chance which is of two sorts either a chance which falleth out by meere oversight and negligence as if a Physitian through carelesnesse mistake the medicine and so kill his patient which might by his care have beene prevented or it falleth out by meere chance which could not be helped as when one heweth wood and the axe-head flieth off and killeth one that standeth by 3. But that kinde which deserveth most favour and may best be excused is when one is forced to kill another se defendendo by defending of himselfe which was the womans case that with a milstone pashed out cruell Abimelechs braines when he attempted to set fire upon the tower and to burne the woman and all the rest of the people there Iudg. 9. QUEST XIII Magistrates are not guiltie of murder in putting malefactors to death ALl kinde of killing is not then unlawfull whereof there are three sorts there is divina vindicta heroica ordinata divine revenge heroicall ordinarie 1. The divine is which is directly and immediatly commanded by God as Abraham at the Lords bidding would have sacrificed his sonne Abraham non solum non est culpatus crudâlitatis crimine sed laudatus est pietatis nomine Abraham was not onely ãâã blamed for his crueltie but commended for his pietie therein So Ioshua had commandement from the Lord to destroy the Canaanites 2. The heroicall kinde of killing is when any being inflamed with the zeale of Gods glorie and extraordinarily stirred by his spirit doe take revenge of the Lords enemies as Sampson upon the Philistims in his death Phineas in zeale killed the adulterer and adulteresse and Samuel hewed Agag the King of Amalek in peeces Marbach 3. The ordinarie killing is by the Magistrate who by direction of the word of God and according to wholesome lawes grounded upon the same doth give sentence of death against malefactors or wageth just battell upon these occasions the Magistrate sinneth not in shedding of bloud The reasons are these 1. Hierome saith Homicidas punire non est sanguinis effusio sed legis ministerium To punish murtherers and other malefactors it is no effusion of bloud but the execution of the law in Ieremiam c. 22. So Gloss. interlinear Index non occidit reum sed lex quae jubet The Judge killeth not the guiltie partie but the law which commandeth 2. Thomas saith Id quod licitum est Deo licitum est ministro ipsius per mandatum ejus That which is lawfull unto God the author of the law is lawfull unto Gods Minister by his Commandement But the Magistrate is Gods Minister Rom. 13.4 2. Places of Doctrine upon the sixth Commandement 1. Doct. Of the generall contents of this Commandement THou shalt not kill This Commandement consisteth 1. Partly in prohibiting all kinde of hurt or wrong to our neighbour either in leaving or forsaking him or in doing him hurt either outwardly by murder rayling reviling or by any injurie whatsoever or inwardly by anger hatred desire of revenge 2. Partly in commanding the preservation of our neighbours life either in not hurting whether provoked or not provoked or in helping either by the depulsion of wrongs and injuries offred or by the collation of benefits 2. Doct. The particular vertues here commanded THe vertues then prescribed in this Commandement are of two sorts either such as doe not hurt or such as are beside helping also Of the first kinde are 1. A particular justice and equitie in all our acts and doings not to hurt or molest any in word or deed by violence fraud or negligence or by any other meanes such an one was Nathaniel a true Israelite in whom there
had taken Lot prisoner and delivered him out of their hands Gen. 14. 3. The manner also must bee considered that although the cause of warre be just yet that it be not rashly set upon but all other meanes must first be tried as Ezekiah before he would by force resist the King of Assyria sought to have pacified him by paying a certaine tribute 2 King 18.14 So the children of Israel before they assaulted their brethren the children of Benjamin by open warre because of the wickednesse of the Gibeonites committed against the Levites wife first required of them that those wicked men might be delivered into their hands which when they wilfully refused then they resolved to set upon them Iudg. 20.13 Ex Simlero 4. Confut. Against the Romanists that make difference betweene counsels and precepts IN the next place the Romanists are to bee dealt withall and here commeth first to be examined that assertion that whereas we affirme that even in this Commandement Thou shalt not kill that dutie of charitie is prescribed even in loving our enemies they affirme that this is no precept which we are bound to keepe but a counsell of perfection and a worke of supererogation Thom. Aquin. 2.2 qu. 25. art 9. Contra. 1. This derogateth from the authoritie of Christ to say that he gave counsell to his Disciples and did not by his authoritie command them 2. Seeing all the duties of charitie are required by the law for love is the fulfilling of the law it followeth that even this dutie also in loving our enemies is enacted by the law and not left free 3. Our Saviour adding further as a reason hereof that ye may bee children of your Father which is in heaven sheweth that wee cannot otherwise bee the true children of our heavenly Father unlesse we be like him herein even in loving of our enemies then it will follow that it is not a counsell of conveniencie but a precept of necessitie Ex Bastingio See more of this popish distinction of counsels and precepts Synops. Centur. 1. err 84. 5. Confut. Against the Popish distinction of mortall and veniall sinnes ANother assertion of the Romanists here to be taxed is that anger si sit talis motus ut deducatur ratio est peccatum mortale c. If it be such a motion as that the reason is drawne to consent it is a mortall sinne Si usque ad consensum non pervertitur ratio est peccatum venidle c. But if reason be not perverted to consent then it is a veniall sinne but if it bee not a mortall or deadly sinne in the nature and kinde thereof as is murther and adulterie then although there be a consent it is no mortall sinne Sic Thom. in opuscul This distinction of sinnes veniall and not veniall in their owne nature in respect of the greatnesse or smalnesse of the sinne is not to bee admitted for these reasons 1. In the respect of the nature of sinne which of it selfe deserveth death Rom. 6.23 The wages of sinne is death and sinne is the transgression of the law 1 Ioh. 3.4 and every transgression of the law is under the curse Galath 3.10 2. In respect of the infinite Majestie of God which to violate can bee no veniall sinne of it selfe considering also the perfect and absolute righteousnesse of God which cannot abide the least blemish or imperfection therefore in regard of the perfect righteousnesse and infinite Majestie of God no sinne committed against God can in it selfe bee veniall 3. And concerning this motion and passion of anger even when it is sudden and unadvised though there bee no further purpose or intendment to hurt it is guiltie of judgement Matth. 5.22 Where by the way it shall not bee amisse to note the difference here betweene Thomas Aquin and Bellarmine for Thomas holdeth this anger here spoken of to bee a deadly sinne in that he saith He that is angrie with his brother shall be guiltie of judgement it must be understood dâ matu tendente in nocumentum c. of a motion tending to hurt where there is consent and so that motion is deadly sinne Sic Thomas in opuscul Ex Lippoman But Bellarmine affirmeth that this is a veniall sinne and so deserveth not everlasting damnation because hell fire is onely due unto the last to call one foole Bellarm. lib. 1. de purgator cap. 4. Contra. 1. Every mortall sinne deserveth damnation but in Thomas Aquins judgement as is shewed before this anger here spoken of is a mortall sinne Ergo. 2. The naming of hell fire onely in the last place sheweth not a divers kinde of punishment from the rest but a divers degree of punishment for otherwise judgement in Scripture âs taken for damnation as Psal. 143.2 Enter not into judgement with thy servant for no flesh is righteous in thy sight So Rom. 2.1 In that thou judgest another thou condemnest thy selfe Here to judge and condemne are taken for all one to be culpable then of judgement is to bee guiltie of damnation 4. Yet we admit this distinction of veniall and mortall sinnes if it be understood not in respect of the nature of sinne but of the qualitie of the persons for unto those that beleeve all sinnes are veniall and pardonable through the mercie of God Rom. 8.1 There is no condemnation to those that are in Christ Iesus but to the wicked and unbeleevers all their sinnes are mortall Rom. 6.23 to them the stipend and wages of sinne is death See more also hereof Synops. Papis Centur. 4. err 6. 4. Morall observations 1. Observ. Not to be hastie to anger THou shalt not kill Our blessed Saviour expounding this Commandement Matth. 5.22 sheweth that even hee which is angrie unadvisedly transgresseth this precept which may bee a caveat unto furious cholerike and hastie men that they should bridle their intemperate affections and not give place to rage for as Chrysostome saith Si concedatur licentia irascendi datur causa homicidii faciendi If libertie be granted unto anger even cause many times will bee given of murther But if any man shall say when hee is angrie with a man for railing and reviling that hee is angrie with his sinne let him consider that when he heareth the name of God blasphemed he is not so much moved which sheweth that he is angrie in respect of his owne name and person which is called in question and not simply for the sinne Simler 2. Observ. The challenging of one another into the field forbidden ANd if it be simply unlawfull to kill then let such looke unto it that take it to be their honour and estimation to challenge one another into the field whereupon often ensueth murther for we have otherwise learned in the Scriptures Omnem cupiditatem seipsum ulciscendi vetitam esse That all desire for a man to revenge himselfe is unlawfull Simler For such doe usurpe the Lords office The Wise-man saith Say not thou I will recompence
the law of Christ but that much was permitted and tolerated unto the Jewes onely for the hardnesse of their heart as our blessed Saviour sheweth Matth. 19. 2. Some doe urge the lawes of men and the greater punishments which have beene laid upon women for adulterie rather than upon men and that therefore the sinne of the woman should bee the greater But this sheweth not the greatnesse of the sinne before God but the greater inconvenience that is brought upon the civill and politike state which the lawes of men seeke chiefly to preserve by the adulterie of the woman rather than of the man 3. Some thinke that it is a greater sinne in the man because of his authoritie quia vir caput mulieris because the man is head of the woman and the Apostle biddeth that women if they would learne any thing should aske their husbands at home 1 Cor. 14.35 Est ergo vir doctor mulieris The man then is the womans teacher then as the Priest sinneth more than a lay man because he is his teacher so the man doth more grievously offend than the woman Thomas in opuscul But this proveth not that the sinne of the man simply is greater than the sinne of the woman but in a certaine respect 4. Wherefore the best answer is that the sinne of adulterie in some respects is equall in both sexes and in some other greater both in the one and the other 1. In regard of the law of Matrimonie whereby they have given their faith each to the other the sinne seemeth to be equall for the man hath no more power over himselfe in this behalfe than the woman as S. Paul teacheth 1 Cor. 7.4 and therefore by Moses law as well the adulterer as the adulteresse was to be put to death 2. But in respect of the qualitie and condition of the person because the woman is the weaker vessell and the man is the head of the woman and of the more strength this sinne is greater in the man because hee therein give than evill example to the weaker partie and teacheth her an evill lesson Ecclesiasticus 9.1 3. But the inconveniences considered that follow hereupon as the ignominie and shame of houses the confusion of inheritances and the obtruding of false heires by the adulterie and false play of women their sinne is thought to exceâd Simler Which might be the reason also why among the Jewes the men were permitted to have divers wives but not the women to have divers husbands QUEST IX Whether adulterie be now necessarily to be punished by death SOmewhat here would bee inserted concerning the punishment of adulterie by the sentence of death wherein there are these three opinions 1. Some thinke that adulterie ought to be punished capitally according to the judiciall law of Moses and not otherwise Piscaetor giveth divers reasons hereof but two especially I will single out 1. Delicta temporibus naturam suam non mutant Sinnes doe not change their nature in time 2. Deus naturam suam non mutat Neither doth God change his nature so that he hateth sinne no lesse now than in times past neither will he have it lesse punished Praefat. in Exod. Contra. 1. The nature of sinne is the same though the punishment bee altered adulterie is as grievous before God now as it was under the law but the circumstances as of place and person so also of time may give occasion of aggravating or alleviating the punishment Hee that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath was stoned to death Numb 30. because it was necessarie that the law at the beginning being then newly given should bee established by severitie But yet our Saviour excuseth his Apostles for gathering and rubbing eares of corne upon the Sabbath Matth. 12. Saint Peter pronounced the sentence of death upon Aâamas and Sapphira for deteining part of that which they had given to the Church for the terror and example of others yet now such dissimulation is not held to be worthie of death 2. Neither is God changed by the changing or mitigating the rigour of the law but he removing the same applieth his law according to the different respect of ãâã and persons for as well hee might bee said to be changed in the changing of other ãâã as of the ceremoniall and judicials thereto annexed 4. If all judicials annexed to the Morall law are now to be necessarily retained then the violating of the rest of the Lords day as then of the Sabbath which was in that respect morall should be punished with death and blaspheming and prophaning of the name of God by swearing as Levit. 24.16 which would seeme to be too rigorous 5. And seeing the times of the Gospell are the times of mercie and those under the Law were the times of rigour and severitie to abate somewhat of the rigorous punishments of the Law not leaving sinne unpunished may seeme not unlawfull 2. Another opinion is that adulterie is not at all now to be punished by death for our Saviour would not condemne the woman taken in adulterie Ioh. 8. Contra. 1. Upon that example of Christ it cannot be gathered that it is unlawfull to censure adultery by death for it would follow as well that adultery is not to be punished at all because Christ inflicteth no punishment at all upon her onely this may be inferred that by Christs silence and forbearance it appeareth that the punishment of adultery by death is not necessary for if his will had beene that the rigour of that law should stand in force our Saviour needed not to have feared their trap lest they should have condemned him of rigour and severitie if he had judged her worthie of death and if he had repealed that law they would have accused him as contrarie to Moses 3. This then may bee collected by Christs silence and connivence that it is not necessarie that adulterie should alwayes and in all places be sentenced unto death but rather that it is left indifferent that neither those Churches are to be condemned of too great severitie which follow the president of Moses judicials herein nor yet they are to be accused of too much lenitie which judge adulterie otherwise than by death as they see it best to fit their estate so that the severitie of the punishment be answerable to the quality of the sinne By Moses law they which committed adulterie were to die the death that is if it were duplex adulterium that both the adulterer and adulteresse were married or if the woman were anothers wife Levit. 20.10 otherwise it was not death for a married man beside his wife to have a Concubine or to one wife to take another so shee were not anothers wife What will they thinke now of such single adulterie that would have it revenged by death they have no president in Moses law for the punishing of this kinde of adulterie by death then it is evident that all adulterie by the law of Moses was not adjudged to
death The Romane lawes followed Moses president in punishing of adulterers so did some other nations beside The King of Babel burnt Zedekiah and Ahab two false Prophets with fire for committing adultery Ierem. 29.23 Among the Egyptians the man taken in adulterie was beaten with a thousand stripes the woman had her nose cut off Diodor. Sicul. lib. 2. cap. 3. The Germanes used to set the adulteresse naked before her kindred and cut off her haire and then her husband dâave her before him through the street beating her with cudgels Cornel. Tacit. de morib German The Cumeans placed the adulteresse in the Market place upon a stone in open view that shee might be derided and scorned of all and then set her upon an asse and ever after shee was called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã an asse rider and the stone they abhorred as an uncleane thing Plutar. tom 1. in quastionib Graciâ These or some other grievous punishment may be imposed upon the odious crime of adulterie where it is not recompensed with losse of life but to dallie with so great iniquitie and either to winke at it or to let it passe with a light and superficiall checke is displeasing to God and offensive to all good men See more of this question how farre Moses Judicials doe now binde 1 qu. generall in Exod. QUEST X. Whether it be lawfull for the husband to kill his wife taken in adulterie BUt whereas the ancient Romane lawes permitted the husband to kill his wife taken in adulterie as appeareth in the declamations of Seneca how a man having lost both his hands in warre comming home and taking his wife with another in adulterie commanded his sonne to kill them both and for refusing hee did abdicate and renounce him for his sonne Some would justifie this also as lawfull pretending the example of Phinehes that stroke the adulterer and adulteresse thorow at once Contra. 1. Though the ancient lawes did not punish the husband that killed his wife taken in adulterie yet that act was not thereby made lawfull but the law did therein beare with the just griefe of the husband 2. And though the lawes of men should tolerate it yet before God he committeth murther because he doth it in his rage and in his owne revenge 3. But the lastâr Romane lawes gave no such libertie for the man to kill his wife but onely the adulterer with whom shee is taken in her husbands house for by this meanes if men hated their wives they might seeke occasion to be rid of them and if he were a Noble personage with whom the woman was found it was not lawfull for the husband to kill him but only to keepe him foure and twentie houres prisoner at home untill he brought the witnesses 4. Phinehes example is altogether unlike for beside that he was stirred by the extraordinarie motion of the Spirit if this president should be followed it might be lawfull for any man to kill the adulterer and the adulteresse and not for the husband onely for both of these whom Phinehes killed were strangers unto him the man was of another tribe and the woman a Midiaâiâesse ex Simlerâ QUEST XI Simple fornication whether a breach of this Commandement THou shalt not commit adulterie c. 1. Some are of opinion that simplex fornicatio single fornication which is soluti cum soluta of a single man with a single woman is not here forbidden Oleaster Hee granteth that fornication with a woman quae esset alteri vel omnibus exposita which was either defiled by another or common to many was forbidden to the Israelites as Deut. 22.21 Shee that played the where in her fathers house should be put to death but otherwise it was not in this Commandement therefore he thinketh adultery only to be forbidden according to the native signification of the word naâph which signifieth only to commit adultery Contra. 1. But I rather preferre the opinion of Aben Ezrah a learned Rabbin who thinketh Oââem concubitum qui non est viri cum uxore sua hîc esse prohibitum That all companying with a woman beside of the man with the wife is here forbidden for seeing single fornication is against the Law of nature as Iudah before the Law was written adjudged Thamar for her whoredome to the fire Gen. 38. as Oleast himselfe confesseth it must also of necessity be held to be a breach of the Morall law which is grounded upon the Law of nature 2. And as for the use of the word Augustine well sheweth by the interpretation of our blessed Saviour Matth· 5.9 that even adultery is a kinde of fornication Hee that dismisseth his wife except for fornication causeth her to commit adulterie the word is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã fornication which is taken for ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã adulterie Beza in hunc locum 2. But that single fornication even betweene parties both unmarried and unbetrothed is forbidden in this Commandement it shall bee manifested by these reasons 1. Augustine thus argueth 1. If that kinde of fornication be not forbidden here Vbi sit illa prohibita in decalogo utrum inveniri possit ignore Whether it can be found prohibited elsewhere in the decalogue I am ignorant c. But it is certaine that it is either forbidden here or no where in the morall law 2. Againe Si furti nomine bene intelligitur omnis illicita usurpatio rei alienae c. if under the name of theft is well understood all unlawfull usurping of other mens goods Profectò nomine moechiae omnis illicitus concubitus c. by the same reason also by the name of adulterie all unlawfull companie with a woman is forbidden August quaest 71. in Exod. 3. Further Augustine in another place thus reasoneth Say not Vxorem non habeo c. I have no wife and therefore I sinne not against her neither doe I covet another mans wife ad meretricem eo I goe unto an harlot In Deum pecccas cujus imaginem per diffluentias libidinis in te violasti c. Thou sinnest against God whose image thou hast violated in thy selfe by thy overflowing lust 4. Againe Dominus quiscit quid tibi utile sit uxorem concessit hoc pracepit hoc jussit The Lord who knoweth what is best for thee hath granted thee a wife that thou shouldest not wander in lust this he commandeth thee to doe if thou canst not containe thy selfe c. Therefore the fornicator in giving himselfe to lust and refusing the remedie which God hath appointed therein offendeth against God 2. Thom. Aquin. addeth these arguments 1. A rigno Dei non excluditur aliquis nisi per peccatum mortale c. one is not excluded the Kingdome of heaven but by a mortall sinne but fornication excludeth out of the Kingdome of God 1 Cor. 6.9 therefore it is a deadly sinne 2. Licet non detur corpus uxoris datur tamen corpus Christi c. although he have not a wife given
may bee some blemish and imperfection in the manner seeing our best actions are stained as the Prophet saith All our righteousnesse is ãâã filthie clouts Isai. 64.4 3. If veniall sin be taken for a small offence wee denie not but that such blemishes are found in matrimoniall duties which are tolerated and covered in mariage according to that excellent saying of Augustine Libidinis voluptas non propter nuptias cadit in culpam sed propter nuptias accipit veniam The pleasure of lusts doth not take blame because of mariage but for mariage sake doth receive pardon Lib. 1. de concupis cap. 15. 4. But mortall or deadly sin in mariage there is none that is in his sense haynous and grievous for if his meaning be that the fleshly desire would extend it selfe to another that is coveteth strange flesh this is not incident unto any act of mariage but is a violating of mariage by adulterous and unchaste thoughts And if there could be any sâch mortall and deadly sin in the duties of mariage what is become of that saying of the Apostle concerning the giving in mariage Hee sinneth not 1 Cor. 7.36 which also may bee understood of the duties of mariage Augustine hath this worthie saying Sicut bono uti malè malum est ita maleâti bene bonum est benè utitur bono continentiam dedicans Deo bono utitur malè continentiam dedicons idolo malo utitur male concupiscentiam relaxans adulteriâ bene utitur malo concupiscentiam restringââs connubio As it is evill to use a good thing evill so it is good to use an evill thing well as hee useth a good thing well that dedicateth his continencie unto God hee useth a good thing evill that dedicateth his continencie to an Idoll hee useth an evill thing evill that doth loose the reines of his concupiscence to adulterie he useth an evill thing evill who restraineth his concupiscence to matrimonie August cont Pelag. 1.19 If he doe an evill thing well that limiteth and keepeth his concupiscence within the bounds of mariage hee then cannot sinne mortally V. Confut. Against Tostatus that would not have simple fornication punished by humane lawes AGainst Tostatus here also worthily exception is taken who justifieth this defect and imperfection in humane lawes he meaneth such as are practised among the Romanists which doe not punish simple fornication these are his words Injustissima civilis lex esset qua âeretrices tolleret That should be a most unjust Civill law which should take away strumpets and punish simple fornication c. Wee will see and examine his reasons 1. Civill lawes are only to restraine such sins whereby justice is violated and injurie done unto another but in fornication there is no act of injustice Non est ibi aliqua persona cui inferatur injuria There is no person there to whom any injurie can bee done Contra. There is a manifold wrong committed in single fornication 1. They offer wrong and dishonour unto Christ in making the members of Christ the members of an harlot 1 Cor. 6.15 2. They injurie themselves in sinning against their owne bodies in defiling and polluting them ibid. vers 18. 3. They doe wrong unto their posteritie bringing upon them the shame of bastardie making them illegitimate and disenabling them to inherit 2. If humane lawes should punish fornication it would give occasion unto adulterie incest Sodomitrie seeing the most in a common-wealth are weake and imperfect and if they were restrained from this smaller vice they would fall into greater enormitieâ Contra. 1. As though God hath not appointed a remedie against fornication and all other uncleannesse by lawfull matrimonie shall men make themselves wiser than God and seeke to cure one evill by another 2. And thus the divine order is perverted among the Romanists for they restraine mariage and give way unto fornication and therefore it is no marvell if among them such unnaturall lusts doe reigne Bernard well sheweth the reason thereof Tolle de Ecclesia honorabile conjugâum c. Take away from the Church honorable matrimonie he saith not take away harlots and brothel houses as Tostatus doth shal ye not replenish it with incestuous persons with concubinaries Sodomiticall vices c. supeâ Cant. serm 66. 3. Humane lawes are not to forbid all sinnes because Homo legem ponens non potest dare gratiam praeservativam c. because man making a law cannot give preseruing grace to keepe it and this was the cause why Lex Mosis non prohibâbat omnia vitia Moses law did not forbid all vices because therein was no grace given or helpe ministred to avoid them therefore some things were permitted among them as to take usurie of the Gentiles to give a bill of divorcement and such like So Tostatus quaest 23. Contra. 1. By this reason humane lawes should forbid no sins because Gods word not mans law giveth grace to abstaine from any sin 2. Neither is there any sin forbidden in the new Testament against the morall law which is not prohibited in the old as it may appeare by our blessed Saviours interpretation of the law Mat. 5. wherein he giveth no new law but only expoundeth the old 3. Though Moses law gave no grace to keepe it yet because it was a Schoolemaster to bring us unto Christ Gal. 3.19 it was fit it should be a perfect law and containe a strict rule of all righteousnesse that men the rather should bee driven unto Christ seeing themselves to come so farre short 4. The toleration of some things among the Israelites for their hardnesse of heart sheweth not a defect in the law but an imperfection in them that could not bee subject to the perfect rule of the law 5. And concerning the punishment of fornication it was not omitted in Moses law for although fornication with one were recompenced with marriage and paying of the dowrie Deut. 22.24 yet if a daughter in Israel did play the whore she was stoned to death ibid. vers 21. And seeing the law saith There shall not bee a whore of the daughters of Israel Deut. 23.17 how dare any defend the tolerating and suffering of whores in a Christian Common-wealth 4. Morall observations 1. Obser. Against shamelesse adulterers that thrust themselves into the Congregation of the Lords people THou shalt not commit adulterie This sin being so haynous in the sight of God whereby both the ordinance of God is perverted and matrimoniall faith mutually given violated and the Temples of the holy Ghost defiled hereby their impudencie unshamefastnesse and profanenesse is evident that being guiltie of this sin dare presume to come into the Lords house to offer themselves to heare the Word to receive the Sacraments or communicate in any other exercise of religion against whom the Prophet thus enveigheth Will you steale murther commit adulterie c. and come and stand before me in this house whereupon my name is called and say wee are delivered though wee have done all these
abominations Ierem. 7.9 Chrysostome well sayth to this purpose Non est locuâ hic lupanar sed Ecclesia si membra meretricis habes abesto ab Ecclesia ne praesentiâ tuâ sordescat This place is no brothelhouse but the Church if thou hast the members of an harlot absent thy selfe from the Church lest it be defiled by thy presence c. homil 62. super loan 2. Obser. Against fornication ANd let not onely adulterers take heed unto themselves even fornication between those that are not married is a grievous offence before God who will not onely judge adulterers but whoremongers also Hebr. 13.4 And that saying of the Apostle may bee applied against fornication as well as adulteries Know yee not that yee are the Temple of God c. if any man destroy the Temple of God him shall God destroy 1 Cor. 3.16 Whereupon Augustine thus writeth Non vis corrumpi domum tuam quare corrumpiâ ãâã Dei Thou wouldest not have thine house corrupted or defiled why then doest thou corrupt the house of God lib. dâ in chord cap. 9. And these mischiefes fornication bringeth with it 1. Perdit animaâ The fornicator destroyeth his owne soule Prov. 9.18 Hee knoweth not that the dead are there and that her guests are in the depth of hell 2. Consumit substantiam He consumeth and wasteth his substance Prov. 6.16 Because of the whorish woman a man is brought to a morsell of bread 3. Vilificat prolem It maketh their posteritie vile and base as the Apostle sheweth Otherwise were your children uncleane 1 Cor. 7.14 that is without mariage 4. Privat honore c. It depriveth of honour and purchaseth an everlasting blot Prov. 6.32 Hee shall find a wound and dishonour and his reproach shall never bee put away Thomas in opuscul 3. Obser. Against disguising of the bodie and uncomely apparell AVgustine sheweth how this Commandement is otherwise transgressed by light behaviour disordered apparell disguising of the bodie Habitus impudicus corporis est nuntius adulterini cordis The unshamefast behaviour of the bodie is the messenger of an adulterate heart Superflua inordinata capilatura vestimentorum muliebrium affectata similitudo as Superfluous and inordinate haire and affectation of womens garments c. And in women Fucatafacies capillorum nativi coloris adulteratio A painted face colouring of the haire imitating the fashion of mens garments c. August serm 347. The one S. Paul reproveth in men 1 Cor. 11.14 Doth not nature it selfe teach you that if a man have long haire it is a shame unto him The other S. Peter reprehendeth in women As their broydred haire and gold put about and the putting on of apparell 1 Pet. 3.3 The eighth Commandement 1 Questions discussed QUEST I. Whether the stealing of men only bee forbidden in this precept Vers. 15. THou shalt not steale R. Salomon is of opinion that only the stealing of men is prohibited here because that kinde of stealth onely was punished by death other kinds of theft by restitution either of double or quadruple Contra. 1. It doth evidently appeare that all kinde of theft and not that of men onely is here forbidden by these two reasons first because the Morall law only as grounded upon the law of nature did binde both Iewes and Gentiles the Judicials only concerned the Israelites therefore if other thefts had beene restrained only by the Judicials and not by the Morall law the Gentiles would not have condemned the stealing of goods as well as of men as they did Secondly the Judicials did only binde the people after they were delivered unto them not before but it was a sinne to steale in Israel even before they had received the Judicials 2. The ground of his opinion is not found that the breach of every morall law was punished by death for the coveting of a mans ox or asse though this coveting had proceeded to act was not judged worthie of death Tostat. qu. 24. QUEST II. Of the order and phrase used in this precept THou shalt not steale 1. Next unto those wrongs which either are done unto a mans single person as in offering violence to his life or in persona conjuncta in his coupled and conjoyned person namely his wife in committing adulterie next after follow those injuries which concerne his substance and such things as appertaine unto him Thomas in opuscul 2. And first of all prohibentur nocumenâa quae infertimiur facto those hinderances are forbidden which are done in fact then those quae inseruntur verbo which are done in word as in 9. precept Thou shalt not beare false witnesse Lyran. 3. But here this word theft is more generally taken quà m apud juriscânsu tos than among the Lawyers Borrah for it signifieth quamlibet alienae rei usurpationem any kinde of usurping of that which is another mans Gloss. interlinear 4. And the reason why all violence fraud circumvention is prohibited under the name of theft is Furandi verbum posuit quod ut probrosâm omnibus naturaliter exhorrent He useth the word stealing which all men by nature doe abhorre is ignominious that we might the better be perswaded to abstaine from all kinde of theft Calvin For men cunningly doe glose and colour their vicious and corrupt dealing with honest names as fraud and deceit is called wit and cunning getting of other mens goods providence The Lord therefore to meet with all such daubing doth call things as they are and sheweth how that before him all such wrong-doers are held guiltie of theft QUEST III. Of the generall heads of the things here prohibited THree things in generall are forbidden in this Commandement 1. The unjust getting of other mens goods which is 1. Either by rapine or violence either of sacred things or of prophane and common 2. Or else by theft and pilfring 3. Or by deceit circumvention and fraud 2. All dammages discommoditie or hinderance which either is brought upon another by hatred evill will enmitie or else which is not turned aside and declined from our brother it being in our power 3. The abuse of mens goods and substance is likewise here condemned either in the evill bestowing and expending of them in vaine and unprofitable things or in the unjust holding and possessing and not imploying of them when necessitie requireth Simler QUEST IV. Of Sacrilege THe first generall transgression then is in sacrilege which is the stealing either of any sacred thing appointed for holy and sacred uses out of any place sacred or prophane or of any prophane and common thing out of a sacred place And this sacrilege is of two kinds it is either of things spirituall or of things externall and temporall of this latter sort are these 1. The wilfull stealing and withdrawing of such things as are ordained to holy and divine uses which kinde of sacrilege is strictly punished by humane lawes Such was the sinne of Achan in stealing the wedge of gold and the Babylonish garment which God had
other kinde of theft is of things that are prophane and civill which are of two sorts either publike or private 1. The publike theft is either direct when as the publike treasurie is robbed which is much greater than the theft of private things because it redoundeth to the hurt and losse of many Hereunto may be adjoyned the defrauding of such gifts as are bequeathed to publike uses as Iudas was a theefe in robbing the almes of the poore 2. Indirect publike theft is when they which are put in trust with the common goods doe waste and mispend them as Demosthenes said when a poore theefe was led to prison by the officers Parvum furem à majoribus duci That a smal theefe was carried by the greater theeves Private theft is either by taking the things belonging to others consenting or deteyning and withholding them the first is distinguished in respect of the matter the things that are stollen and taken away or the ãâã The things are of foure sorts 1. Of men which kinde of theft was punished by death by the law of ãâ¦ã 21.16 2. Of cattell as the stealing of Oxe or Sheepe which theft was punished by restitution Exod. 22.1 3. Of goods which are called moveables whereof see the law Exod. 22. 7. 4. In remooving of land markes which kinde of theft concerned their lands and possessions Deut. 19. 14. Now theft also differeth in the manner for it is either committed by privie and secret stealth which wee call pilfring and filching of which kinde the Prophet Ieremie speaketh chap. 2.26 As a theefe is ashamed when he is taken or by breaking into houses Exo. 22.2 which is commonly called Burglarie or by open force and violence such is robbing by the high way whereof mention is made in the parable of the Samaritane of the man that fell among theeves and was wounded and left for halfe dead Luk. 10. This kinde of private theft is also committed by consenting and being accessarie thereunto Psal. 50. 18. When thou seest a theefe thou runnest with him such are those also which give entertainment to theeves and are their receivers to keepe such things as are stollen which kinde of confederacie with theeves is punished by humane lawes Simler Further they are guiltie also of theft that detaine and withhold the goods of others as they which finde things that are lost and doe not restore them Likewise they which borrow things of their neighbour and doe not make them good See the law Exod. 22.14 They which are indebted to others and have no care to pay their debts but runne away with others goods such are fugitives and voluntarie bankrouts All these are held guiltie of this sin of theft before God and obey not the Apostles rule Give to all men their duty Rom. 13.7 And verse 8. Owe nothing to any man but love one another Where the Apostle maketh two kinde of debts whereof the one may be so paid as nothing remaine of the debt the other is alwaies in paying and never paid which is the debt of charitie Marbachius QUEST IX Of the divers kinds of transactions and contracts THere remaineth the third branch of the first generall kinde of theft and that is by fraud and circumvention which is of two sorts either in such actions and contracts as are lawfull of themselves or by such acts and devices as are altogether unlawfull Now just and lawfull transactions and contracts are of divers sorts and namely these ten in buying and selling giving exchanging pawning trusting farming copartnership tenure for service hiring lending and borrowing all which may bee brought to these two heads all these alienations are either both of the use and right and ownership of a thing or of the use only and each of them either for ever and in perpetuall or for a time only 1. Buying and selling is a bargaining for an equivalent price for any thing both in right and in use 2. Giving is a franke donation of a thing without any satisfaction or recompence 3. Exchanging when one thing is given for another of like value These transactions are perpetuall both of the right of a thing and the use For the use only and not the right are these that follow 4. Morgaging or laying to pawne when house or land or any other thing is conveyed over to another for a certaine time til some condition required be performed Contracts which concerne the use only are these also either for a time 5. As committing a thing to ones trust to keepe 6. Letting out any thing to farme for a certaine rent 7. Copartnership when one putteth in the stocke another employeth his paines and are agreed to divide the profit 8. And when one taketh any ground by tenure and holdeth it for doing of some kinde of service 9. Hiring when one for his money hath the use of a thing 10. When the use of a thing is granted without paying any thing for a time Vrsinus QUEST X. Of the divers kinds of fraud and deceit used in contracts NOw in these lawfull kinds of contracts the frauds which are usually committed are these 1. In the matter and substance and qualitie of the thing transacted and bargained for as when sophisticate and deceitful ware is uttered for that which is good and sound as wine mixed with water in stead of good wine and spices ungarbled and refuse for good and merchandable spice the like deceit may be in cloth in come and all other kind of Merchandize as Amos 8.6 the rich covetous say That wee may buy the poore for silver c. and sell the refuse of Wheat 2. There may be deceit in the quantitie when as the seller useth false weights and measures therefore the law saith Levit. 19.35 You shall not doe unjustly in judgement in line in weight or in measure 3. When too great a price is exacted and the buyer is not ashamed to aske double the price of his ware and sometime take it also as the Prophet crieth out against the covetous men that did sell corne and Made the Ephah small and the shekel great Amos. 8.5 They made the measure lesse and the price greater Genevens 4. Deceit also may be used in the coyne as in clipping it countersetting and corrupting it Simler And therefore it is said that Abraham weighed unto Ephron silver 400. shekels of currant money among Merchants Gen. 23.16 it was both weight and currant money not sophisticated 5. As in bargaining by selling so in other contracts the like deceit may bee practised as in hiring when either the hireling doth not his service faithfully or truly but doth his businesse with eye-service which the Apostle reproveth Ephes. 6.6 or when the master that hireth detaineth the hirelings wages or keepeth it backe by fraud Iames 5.4 as in paying lesse than hee should or with bad money or obtruding and thrusting upon them other base commodities in stead of their wages Simler QUEST XI Of unlawfull and cosening trades THe other
Thom. in opuscul 2. Observ. Not to conceale the truth whether publikely or privately AGaine it is a kinde of false witnesse as is shewed before when the truth is concealed either publikely or privately as when one suffereth his neighbour to be overcome in judgement when hee by his testimony might deliver him As to this purpose may be applied that saying of the Wise-man Prov. 24.11 Deliver those that are drawne to death and wilt thou not preserve them that are led to be slaine And of this kinde is that usuall negligence and oversight of men that privately doe not one tell another of their sinnes which duty is reproved by the law Levit. 19. Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart but thou shalt plainly rebuke thy neighbour and suffer him not to sinne He then which seeth his brother sinne in drunkennesse prophanenesse swearing or howsoever else and holdeth his peace therein offendeth against the rule of charity and is found before God to be an hater of his brother Augustine useth this fit similitude Si hominem videres ambulare incautum in tenebris ubi tu put cum esse scires taceres qualis esses c. If thou shouldest see a man walking in the darke without taking heed where thou knowest there is a pit and holdest thy peace what manner of one wouldest thou shew thy selfe Pracipitat se quis in vitia sua c. One casteth himselfe headlong into vice and vaunteth himselfe in thy hearing of his evill doing and yet thou doest praise him and smilest to thy selfe c. August in Psal. 49. Upon the tenth and last Commandement 1. The questions discussed QUEST I. The last precept Thou shalt not covet whether two or ãâã THou shalt not covet c. 1. Some thinke that this Commandement is to be divided into two and the first to restraine the concupiscence and desire of anothers wife the other the coveting of such things which doe belong unto him which are either moveable or immoveable things the moveable are of two sorts either the things with life and them either reasonable as his man servant his maid servant or unreasonable as his oxe or asse or without life as his goods his immoveable are his house lands possessions Of this opinion is August lib. de 10. chord cap. 9. to whom consenteth Thomas Aquinas and Tostatus and it is the received opinion among the Romanists and some other as Pelargus Osiander Pellican Their reasons shall first be examined 1. Thomas useth this reason Because there are but three Commandements in the first table there must be seven in the second to make up the number of ten And that there are but three in the first table he would prove by the subject or matter of the Commandements which concerne our duty to God which is three-fold Diligenti Deum tria necesse est facere He that loveth God must performe three things 1. Quòd non habeat alium Deum He must have no other God 2. He must honour him therefore it is said Thou shalt not take in vaine c. 3. Libenter quiescat ãâ¦ã He must rest and settle himselfe in God therefore it is said Remember thou keepe holy c. Answ. 1. Thomas here omitteth one principall duty which is the internall ãâã of God for it is not enough to know who is to be worshipped which is prescribed in the first precept Thou shalt have no other Gods but after what manner he will be worshipped that is by a spirituall and internall worship as our blessed Saviour saith Ioh. 4.21 God is a spirit and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and truth This manner of Gods worship is prescribed in the second Commandement Thou shalt make to thy selfe no graven image c. 2. Wherefore thus rather may the ãâã toward God be distinguished his worship is either internall or externall the internall sheweth who is to be worshipped in the first precept and how that is spiritually in the second precept The externall is either private in the confession of Gods name in the third precept or publike in keeping of his Sabbaths Vrsin 2. Lyranus thus reasoneth Those things which are so divers that one may be covered and not the other belong not to one precept Aliquis habens pronitatem ad ãâã non habeââ ad alterum One may have a pronenesse and aptnesse to one and not to another as he may covet his neighbours wife and not covet any of his beside therefore these two kindes of covetings belong not to one precept Answ. 1. This reason may be retorted for so one may be guilty of idolatry and false worship who yet holdeth but one Cod and therefore by this reason the two first precepts which they confound and make but one which divide the last must be distinguished 2. Though in particular he that coveteth a mans wife doth not alwayes covet his oxe or asse yet in generall he coveteth that which is another mans for his wife is properly his as any thing that belongeth unto him therefore the proposition will be denied that the coveting of that which is not joyned with the coveting of another thing belongeth not to the same precept for one may covet a mans house and ground that coveteth not his oxe or asse as Ahab did that desired Naboths vineyard and so by this rule as many particular things there are which may be severally coveted so many particular precepts there should be of coveting 3. Tostatus thus argueth Sicut se habet actus ad actum c. As one act is to another the like respect hath one concupiscence to another but the act of adultery and theft are divers and belong to two divers precepts therefore so should the divers concupiscence tending to those divers acts be divided into two precepts Answ. The argument followeth not because the acts of adultery and theft are forbidden in two divers precepts therefore the concupiscences tending thereunto should for there is difference betweene the conception of sinne and the birth and perfection thereof when sinne is brought forth and perfited then it appeareth of what kinde it is but being yet in the body or in the seed it cannot be so distinguished as darnell and corne being but yet in the grasse cannot bee so well discerned Beside another difference is because the externall acts of theft and adultery differ in the quality of the sinne and oâe is more hainous than another and deserveth a greater punishment and therefore the precepts are fitly distinguished but the like difference of quality and punishment cannot be made in the originall and first concupiscence where the will hath not yet assented 4. Pelargus addeth this reason Duo sunt principia concupiscentiae c. There are two beginnings or occasions of concupiscence one internall the other externall the Apostle calleth them the concupiscence of the flesh and the concupiscence of the eye 1. Ioh. 2.16 therefore they are distinctly to be prohibited Lyranus also saith
the externall worke being by this coherence and connexion an act of the internall powers hath some good or evill in it though not so properly as the internall Sic fere Tostat. quast 29. QUEST VI. The law of Moses did not onely restraine the hand but the minde BEside this opinion of the Hebrewes some other doe hold that the law of Moses did onely restraine the hand and not the minde and to this purpose they urge that place Matth. 5.27 where our Saviour saith It was said unto you of old Thou shalt not commit adulterie c. But I say c. So that of old it seemeth the law onely restrained the outward act but Christ doth forbid more even the inward desire c. Contra. 1. Our blessed Saviour secundùm corum opinionem loquebatur speaketh according to their opinion because they thought they were onely obliged and tied to the outward act and therefore he doth deliver the law from their corrupt interpretations he giveth not a new exposition and this appeareth vers 43. Yee have heard that it hath beene said Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thine enemie but in all the old Testament there is no such precept given by God or libertie for any to hate their enemie our Saviour then meaneth not such sayings as were found in the law but such expositions as they made among themselves Now that even the law of Moses did binde not onely the hand and externall act but the inward will and desire it thus is proved 1. None are said to repent but of that which is evill but they under the law were to repent and to shew themselves contrite even for the internall acts of their minde as Psal. 4.4 Tremble and sinne not examine your heart upon your bed c. Ergo c. 2. It is directly forbidden Levit. 19.17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart which was an internall act and many other such like sinnes of the heart are reproved by the Prophets 3. The law doth not justifie that which is naturally unjust but forbiddeth it now to covet another mans wife is naturally unjust Ergo. For the proposition or first part of the argument if the theft of the Israelites the killing of Isaack intended by Abraham the fornication of Ose chap. 1. be objected these were singulares casus which the the lawgiver commanding thereby declared quod non includerentur sub lege communi that they were not included under the generall law but if this whole law Thou shalt not covet had given a generall libertie for the Jewes to covet anothers wife Non jam declaretur lex sed destrucretur The law should not by this meanes be declared but destroyed For the assumption that it is against the law of nature to covet another mans wife it is evident 1. Because he faileth in the end coveting her onely of lust not for procreation 2. Matrimonie est de jure naturali is grounded even upon the law of nature if then to breake and violate matrimonie bee against the law of nature then to will and purpose so to doe is against nature also yea the will and purpose is rather sinne than the act it selfe for it may fall out that the externall act is sometime without sinne as when a man ignorantly lieth with another woman taking her to bee his wife as Iakob tooke Leah for Rachel but the will and desire is never without sinne Tostat. Burgens addit 7. in cap. 20. would thus excuse this assertion that Moses law prohibebat manum ãâã anâââum did inhibit the hand not the minde not that their meaning is that in no part of Moses law there is any prohibition to be found of the minde for hatred is directly forbidden Levit. 19.17 but that when any externall act is forbidden Non intelligitur ex vi illius praecepti prohiberi actus interior The internall act is not understood to bee forbidden by vertue of that precept as in this precept Thou shalt not kill he is not judged to be guiltie which purposeth to kill and yet killeth not Contra. 1. But our Saviour saith that even this precept is transgressed by the anger and hatred of the heart Matth. 5.22 therefore the law intendeth even by the externall act to forbid the internall also QUEST VII Whether any morall and naturall duties were to be restrained by positive law BUt it will further be objected that the old law was not to give precepts of morall duties 1. The morall precepts are grounded upon the law of nature and such precepts are knowne unto all but the divine law prescribeth such things as otherwise are not neither can bee knowne 2. The keeping of the morall law giveth life Galath 3.12 but the old law was the ministration of death 2 Cor. 3.7 therefore the old law was not to containe morall precepts Contra. 1. The law of God was not onely to give rules of such things as men know by the law of nature but to keepe and preserve them also from errour in those things which they know And therefore because men doe erre and swarve in such things as they know their will and affection not giving way to reason it was fit that a law should be given as well to rectifie their affection as to direct their understanding 2. Beside although these morall duties are grounded upon the law of nature yet seeing the naturall instinct is obscured by mans corruption that dimme light of nature had need of a clearer light by the law to helpe it If man had continued in the perfection of his creation hee should not have needed any other law but seeing mans naturall knowledge is much decaied it was to be revived and renewed by the divine law 3. The rules of direction of mens actions are of foure sorts 1. Some are so well knowne by nature as none can doubt thereof as these that evill is to be shunned and good to be desired that no unjust thing is to bee done of such knowne principles it is not necessarie that any law should bee given 2. Some things may so be searched out by the law of nature as yet that many may erre therein such ãâã the particular precepts of not committing fornication not coveting anotherâ wife therefore because many may erre in these duties it was requisite they should bee determined by the law of God 3. Some things are so derived from the law of nature as yet they are onely searched out by those which are wise such are the positive and judiciall lawes of men that wisely can applie the principles of the law of nature to particular circumstances of this kinde are Moses Judicials 4. Some things cannot at all be concluded by naturall reason but altogether depend upon the will of the institutor and law-maker of this kinde were Moses Ceremonials So then for a full answer to the first objection wee say that if morall duties were so generally and perfitly knowne as that none could doubt of them as are the
slaine and in the other that it is no breach of the Sabbath when necessitie compelleth to breake the rest thereof 1. This were a dispensation to make it lawfull to kill where one cannot justly be put to death and to worke upon the Sabbath where there is no necessitie 2. And a dispensation maketh that lawfull afterward which was not before such dispensation but it was alwayes lawfull both for the Magistrate to put to death and upon like necessitie to intermit or suspend the rest of the Sabbath 3. Beside these interpretations and declarations of these lawes are not devised by man but warranted in Scripture by the Lord himselfe the maker and author of the law and therefore they are not interposed by any humane authoritie Tostat. quast 35. 4. Morall observations 1. Observ. Why covetousnesse is to be taken heed of THou shalt not covet c. Men must not onely withdraw their hands from taking their neighbours goods but restraine their inward coveting and desire and that for these reasons 1. Propter concupiscentiae infinitatem because concupiscence is infinite the desire of the covetous is never satisfied as Isay 5.8 They joyne house to house c. till there be no more place 2. Aufert quietem it taketh away quietnesse Eccles. 5.11 The satiââie of the rich will not suffer him to sleepe 3. Facit divitias inutiles it maketh riches unprofitable Hee that loveth riches shall be without the fruit thereof Eccles. 5.9 4. Tollit justitiââquitatem it hindreth justice For rewards doe blind the wise and pervert the words of the just Exod. 23. 5. Necat charitatem it killeth charitie both of God and our neighbour therefore the Prophet saith Hide not thy selfe from thine owne flesh Isay 58.7 The covetous despiseth his brother who is as his owne flesh 6. Producit omnem iniquitatem it bringeth forth all iniquitie as S. Paul saith 1 Tim. 6.10 The desire of money is the root of all evill Thom. in opuscul 2. Observ. Of the remedies against concupiscence THe remedies against concupiscence are these Basil assigneth these two 1. Si cogitaveris quòd dissolvendus es in terram cessabit insana concupiscentia c. If thou bethinke thy selfe that thou shalt bee dissolved into earth unsound concupiscence will cease 2. Meliorum desiderium minora cogit contemâere The desire of better things will make thee contemne the lesse as the love to the Word of God which is more to be desired than gold will withdraw our love from earthly things Basil. in regula Thomas Aquiâ addeth foure remedies beside 3. Occasiones exteriores fugiendo By shunning all externall occasions as Iob made a covenant with his eyes chap. 31.1 4. Cogitationibus aditum non praebendo In giving no way to the thoughts as by humbling and afflicting the bodie as S. Paul did 1 Corinth 9.27 5. Orationibus insistendo By applying prayer as our blessed Saviour saith that even devils may bee cast out by fasting and prayer Matth. 17.21 6. Licitis occupationibus insistendo c. By being alwayes well occupied for idlenesse brought the Sodomites to lust it was one of their sinnes Ezech. 16.49 Thom. in opuscul 3. Observ. How the Lord hath punished the transgressors of his law THou shalt not covet In the last place I will shew how the Lord hath punished and judged the transgressors of this precept and likewise of the rest The punishment then which is due for the transgression of the law is either divine or humane The humane is that which is inflicted by the lawes of men which are divers according to divers usages of countries and conditions of people among whom one vice may reigne more than another and so more severitie is required But this defect generally is found in humane censures that the transgressions of the second table are more severely punished than those of the first and those in the second which doe concerne mans outward state as theft are more straightly punished than adulterie which Augustine found fault with in his time and he giveth this reason of this partialitie Quia id pejus credimus quod huic vitae nocet Because we thinke that the worse or greater evill which hurteth this life Lib. de Mendac cap. 9. The divine punishment is of two sorts it is either temporall in this life or eternall in the next And for the first where humane lawes are silent or connivent in censuring the sinnes of men yet the divine justice sheweth it selfe As now shall appeare in this particular enumeration of divers presidents and examples of Gods severitie exercised and shewed upon the transgressors of his law 1. Pharaoh is set forth as an example of an Atheist and prophane person who would not acknowledge the God of Israel but said I know not the Lord neither will I let Israel goe Exod. 5.2 who manifestly transgressed the first precept his end was to be drowned in the red Sea 2. Senacherib a most grosse Idolater as he was worshipping his Idoll Nisroch in the temple was slaine of his two sonnes 2 King 19.37 3. He which blasphemed the name of the Lord in the host of Israel was by the Lords commandement stoned to death Levit. 24.11 4. The man also which gathered sticks upon the Sabbath because he did it with an high hand and is contempt was stoned by Gods appointment Numb 15.31 5. Abshalom both a disobedient childe to his father and a rebell against his Prince was hanged by the haire of the head and stricken through with darts and so is made a spectacle unto all stubborne children and rebellious subjects that such should expect the like judgement at Gods hand 6. Cain for killing his innocent brother was cast out of Gods presence and made a runnagate upon the face of the earth Cruell Abimelech as he slew 70. of his brethren upon one stone so his braines were dasht out with a stone Iudg. 9. 7. Ammon an incestuous person was slaine by the procurement of his owne brother Abshalom for the deflouring of his sister Thamar 2 Sam. 13. That whore and strumpet Iezabel was eaten and devoured of dogges 1 King 21.23 2 King 9.22.35 And as adulterie is an abomination to the Lord the punishment whereof God reserveth to himselfe where the Magistrates hand is not extended as the Apostle saith Heb. 13.4 Whoremongers and adulterers God will judge So the sinne of drunkennesse and glutâonie shall not escape the stroke of Gods hand as being the nurserie and seminarie of filthinesse and uncleane lust Drunken Nabal for that sinne and others joyned withall was smitten of the Lord and died 1 Sam. 25.38 And that rich Glutton who pampred himselfe but was mercilesse toward poore Lazarus was tormented in hell Luk. 16. And here I cannot omit to make mention of a strange judgement of God shewed of late upon three persons for this sinne of excessive drinking which happened upon the 27. day of December last being the Lords day next after the Nativitie in the towne
of little Ashen or Eason in Essex in the house of a worshipfull Knight there dwelling The manner of it was this One Thomas Rugesby a servant of the house with another that was a Retainer and a youth about the age of thirteene yeeres did in the afternoone withdraw themselves into a private chamber taking with them strong Beere Aqua vita Rosa solis Tobacco and shut the doore close that they might be privat and take their fill of drinke without controlement who so excessively and immoderatly distempered themselves with drinke that they in most beastly manner vomited it up againe two of them the servant of the house and the youth were in vomiting strangled and were found dead in the morning the first sitting in his chaire the other lying upon the bed that which they cast up being by the cold of the night frozen to their mouths the third the Retainer was taken up in the morning wallowing up and downe in his vomit and in a manner halfe dead whom they had much adoe to recover This example would not bee forgotten but carefully bee laid up in remembrance that other excessive takers of drinke and wanton abusers of plentie which sinnes doe now every where overflow might receive warning thereby and judge themselves by repentance and leaving their sinne in time lest they be suddenly overtaken by Gods judgements in like manner 8. For stealing Achan may bee an example who for his theft and sacrilege was with throwing of stones put to death and that by the Lords extraordinarie direction in causing him to bee found by lot Ioshâ 7. 2. For lying the fearefull examples of Ananias and Sapphira would be thought upon who were for that sinne striken with sudden death Act. 5. 10. For coveting of Sara Abrahams wife both Pharaoh King of Egypt and Abimelech King of Gerar were punished of God Gen. 12. and 20. though they were prevented of God and kept from committing adulterie Thus it pleaseth God to exemplifie some that others might take heed But here concerning the temporall judgements in this life these three observations are necessarie 1. That they which are temporally punished are not alwayes to be deemed the worst of all others though it please the Lord to make them examples to others as our blessed Saviour saith of the Galileans whose bloud Pilate mingled with their sacrifice and of those eighteene persons upon whom the tower of Siloam fell in Jerusalem that they were not greater sinners than the rest but except yee repent saith he yee shall all likewise perish 2. God neither punisheth all such offenders in this life for then men would expect no judgement to come neither doth he suffer all to go unpunished lest worldly men might be altogether secure and denie in their hearts the divine providence as the Prophet David saith Psal. 10.13 Wherefore doth the wicked contemne God he saith in his heart thou wilt not regard 3. That they which goe on still in their sinne without punishment should not flatter themselves for there remaineth a greater judgement behind and there is more hope of them which are chastised in this world So the Apostle saith Thou after thine hardnesse and heart that cannot repent heapest unto thy selfe wrath against the day of wrath and the declaration of the just judgement of God Rom. 2.5 The other kinde of judgement is in the next world as the Apostle sheweth 1 Cor. 6.9 Be not deceived neither fornicators nor Idolaters nor adulterers nor wantons nor buggerers nor theeves nor drunkards nor railers nor extortioners shall inherit the kingdome of God and such were some of you but yee are washed but ye are sanctified c. Adde hereunto the like sentence and declaration of Gods judgement upon the wicked Revelat. 21.8 But the fearefull and unbeleeving the abominable and murtherers whoremongers and sorcerers and idolaters and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone which is the second death This so heavie a sentence there is no way to escape but in being washed from these sinnes by repentance sanctified by newnesse of life and justified by faith in Christ. And thus much of this treatise of the law which by Gods grace I have thus happily finished 3. Questions and doubts discussed out of the rest of this 20. Chapter QUEST I. In what sense the people are said to have seene the voyces which are properly heard and not seene Vers. 18. ANd all the people saw the thunders c. 1. Some thinke that by sight here is understood the hearing because it is usuall with the Hebrewes to take one sense for another Vatabl. But the sight is no more taken for hearing than to heare for the seeing 2. Ambrose referreth it to the understanding Interioris mentis videtur obtâtu It was seene by the inward sight of the minde like as our Saviour saith Hee that hath seene me hath seene my Father Iob. 14.9 Ambros. proââm in Luc. So also Hierome will have it like unto that saying of S. Iohn 1. epist. chap. 1.1 That which we have heard which we have seene with our eyes c. of the word of life Hierom. in Abdiam But seeing Moses speaketh of outward objects of the externall sense as of thunder lightning he meaneth also the sense unto the which such things are objected 3. Ferus thinketh that herein ostenditur oscitantia populi the carelesnesse of the people is shewed who more regarded that which they saw than the voyce which they heard and therefore they are said rather to see than heare But it seemeth that the people well regarded the voyce of God because presently after they desire that Moses might speake unto them and not the Lord any more 4. Procopius thinketh that it is said they saw because of the evidence thereof as if they had seene it with their eyes as it is said Amos 1.1 The words of Amos c. which hee saw c. Deus Prophetarum oculis res subjicit tanta evidentia ac si oculis cernerent c. God doth so evidently set things before the eyes of the Prophets that is their inward sight as though they saw them with their eyes But this was not done in vision as the Lord spake to his Prophets here was a sensible demonstration 5. Augustine therefore thinketh Videre hic poni pro generali sensu tam animi quam corporis That to see is here put for the generall sense both of the minde and bodie because Moses would speake compendiously so we use to say vide quid sonet see what soundeth so also is it taken for other senses as Christ saith to Thomas Because thou hast seene me thou beleevest whereas Thomas touched him Tract 121. super Ioann The reason hereof is Quia visus primatum obtinet in sensibus intermiscetur omnibus Because the sight is the chiefe among the senses it is as intermingled among them all Interlinear And Sensus visus plures rerum differentias nobis ostendit
the reason thereof is because shee was sold upon hope of marriage which hope because shee is frustrate of this provision must be made by way of recompense But this maid is not like to have beene abused for then it had not beene enough to let her goe out free but he should endow her also according to the Law chap 23.16 3. Oleaster thus resolveth this text This maid either her master had company with or had not if the first either she displeased afterward and then he was to redeeme her that is to set her free or shee pleased then the father either tooke her to wife and so he was to use her as his wife on his sonne then hee should use her as his daughter or if he tooke another wife he was to provide all necessary things for her Now if her master had not knowne her she was to serve him to the yeere of Jubile unlesse shee before redeemed her selfe Contra. Oleaster faileth here in these points 1. Hee taketh redeeming for setting her free without money whereas redemption of a servant was not without money 2. If he had defiled her he was not only to set her free but to endow her as before is shewed 3. If âhe maid was to serve him to the yeere of Jubile the maid servants should have lesse privilege than the Hebrew men servants that were to serve but six yeeres whereas this Law intendeth them greater favour 4. This then is the summe of the Law A man buyeth a maid servant an Hebrewesse he was either to suffer her friends to redeeme her or to marry her himselfe or give her to his sonne if none of these he was either to keepe her still providing all things necessary for her or to let her goe out free for nothing Iun. QUEST XXXIV Of the end scope and intent of this Law NOw concerning the end of this Law it is to be considered 1. That the father which should either of any unnaturall affection or compelled by necessity sell his daughter might by this meanes be punished by losing all his right and interest in his daughter who did now being sold out of her fathers power in familiam Domini transire passe and was as incorporate into her masters family Iun. And so the father should be as it were bridled hereby from selling of his daughter 2. Beside this Law imposing such hard conditions upon the master in such liberall sort to provide for his servant so bought thereby also provideth ut aut non emerentur ancillae that either maids should not be bought at all though their fathers were so hard hearted to sell them aut meliore conditione servirent or they should serve with better condition otherwise than as common servants Osiand Marbach And so this Law taketh order ut nunquam capite vacent that maids should never be without an head Iun. And so taketh care for them as the weaker sex 3. Further in that the master was permitted to take his maid to his wife though he had another before ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã temporis licitum erat that was lawfull by the sufferance and toleration of those times Pelarg 4. Againe though it were simply unlawfull for the parents to sell their children sed ne progrediatur impietat ad intolerabilem iniquitatem c. but lest such impiety should proceed to intolerable iniquity and injury this Law provideth for such as were oppressed pro tanto sed non in totum though not wholly and totally yet to keepe them within some measure Lippom. 5. But this Law was much more equall than that Law of the ancient Romans in the 12. Tables which permitted fathers to sell their sonnes not once but againe and the third time only he was excepted which had married a wife with his fathers consent which was afterward forbidden C. de lib. posth or then that Law of Constantine that one might sell his sonne for extreme need and poverty though the sonne might afterward redeeme himselfe for the condition of children so sold was more tolerable among the Hebrewes their service being but for a time Simler This Law also is more reasonable than that constitution of Iustinian tit 6. de manumission that unlesse the maid servant were married within six moneths ab hero non dimittebatur shee was not at all to be dismissed from her master Pelarg. QUEST XXXV What kinde of smiting is here meant Vers. 12. HE that smiteth a man that hee dye 1. Here percussio accipitur pro occisione smiting is taken for killing Lyran. For if a man were smitten and died not of it there was another punishment than by death vers 19. Tostat. 2. Quamvis aliquo pòst tempore meriatur c. Although he dye not presently but some while after that is so smitten he shall suffer death for it Galas 3. The words are generall He that smiteth a man whether he were an Hebrew or no Hebrew his enemy or friend ex re percussa intquitas percutientis manifestatur the iniquity of the smiter appeareth by the thing that is smitten Cajetan 4. The Latine reads he that smiteth a man volens occidere having a purpose to kill him shall dye But two exceptions are taken to this reading for if a man did smite one non animo occidendi sed animo percutiendi not with a minde to kill him but to smite him only he should dye for it Cajetane And againe if a man intended to kill and did not he was not to dye for it for although before God he be a murtherer that intendeth it in his heart yet the Law of Moses doth not punish the intent only of murther but the effect Simler QUEST XXXVI Why the murtherer was to dye the death SHall dye the death c. 1. That is shall surely dye for this doubling of the word importat majorem certitudinem importeth greater certainty Tostat. The Interlinearie glosse expoundeth Morte spirituali vel corporali Death spirituall or bodily but I preferre the other sense 2. This Law is set downe in generall that whosoever smiteth so that death follow five intendat occidero sive non whether he purposed to kill or not should dye for it but afterward follow certaine exceptions from this Law Oleaster This then is a generall Law that he which killeth should be killed againe Lippom. 3. And this Law is grounded even upon the Law of nature for like as it is agreeable to nature Vt putridum membrum abscindatur ut reliqua conserventur that a rotten member should be cut off that the rest be preserved so a murtherer is to be killed ne plures occidentur lest more should be killed Lippom. This Law is given unto Noah Genes 9. when the world was restored and here it is but repeated and renued Pelarg. 4. The Lawes of other nations herein consent with Moses the Athenians did severely punish murther expelling the murtherer from the Temples of the gods and from all society and colloquy of men till he had
as here Contra. 1. By neighbour any man whosoever is understood 2. And expresse mention is made here of the will and intention because it is an explanation of the former law Simler 3. Iunius thinketh that not he onely which killeth sed qui conatus est occidere but went about to kill is comprehended in this law as Deut. 19.19 Ye shall doe unto him as he had thought to doe unto his brother Contra. 1. It seemeth by the generall law vers 12. that this constitution is onely for murther committed and not intended onely for such smiting the law speaketh of whereupon death followeth 2. That law given in instance Deut. 19. is touching false witnesses whose false testimonie breaketh out into action into false witnesse bearing so that there is not an intention onely for the false witnesse by his false testimonie acteth as much as in him lieth to take away the life of his brother that place therefore is impertinent to this purpose I approve here rather the judgement of Cajetane Nec describuntur haec intus in animo sed prodeuntia extra in actiones Neither are these things described onely in the minde but proceeding without into action QUEST XLI Of the difference betweene voluntarie and involuntarie murther and the divers kinds of each HEre then there is a manifest distinction of involuntarie and voluntarie murther or killing grounded upon the law of Moses· 1. Involuntarie killing is of two sorts there are ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã chances unlooked for and sudden events as when one shooteth an arrow and killeth one unawares as Peleus killed his sonne being in hunting with him There are beside these ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã errors and oversights as the father beateth his childe purposing onely to chastise him and hee dieth of that beating a Physition ministreth physick to his patient intending to cure him and doe him good and he dieth of it Borrh. 2. There are likewise two kinds of voluntarie or wilfull murther ex proposito of purpose ex impetu animi in heat or rage These kinde of murthers are called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã iniquities one may be slaine ex proposito purposely either per insidias by lying in wait when one watcheth for the life of a man and taketh him at advantage as Ioab killed Abner and afterward Amasa they suspecting no such thing so Ismael killed Gedoliah Ierem. 41. Or els per industriam when one of set purpose picketh quarrels and seeketh occasions to provoke a man that he may kill him both these kinds are touched here Tostat. quaest 16. Then one may bee killed in heat and rage when there was no purpose before as Alexander the Great killed Clitus Pelarg. This kinde though not so grievous as the other yet is a kinde of voluntarie killing So there is extant a constitution of Hadrian the Emperour against him qui per lasciviam causam mortis praebuisset which was the cause of anothers death through wantonnesse and riot though there were no enmitie before that such an one should be banished five yeeres Simler QUEST XLII Why the wilfull murtherer was to be taken from the Altar Vers. 14. THou shalt take him from mine Altar 1. This may bee understood either of the Altar of incense which was in the holy place or of the Altar of burnt offring rather which was without the Tabernacle in the Court for thither every one might easily flee that had committed any such offence but to the Arke no escape could be made because there was no entrance thither 2. R. Salomon saith that this is meant even of the Priest that sacrificed at the Altar who after he had finished his service at the Altar might be taken thence and judged by the law as other malefactors and murtherers Which collection of his may be received saving that it is not like they would suffer a murtherous Priest to minister at the Altar 3. But that other conceit of R. Salomon whom Lyranus followeth hath no good ground that he that had killed an Hebrew wilfully might be taken from the Altar as Ioab was but if he had onely killed a Gentile as a Moabite or Ammonite though of set purpose he was not to be taken thence but was privileged by the Altar But the contrarie appeareth that this law forbiddeth all voluntarie and wilfull murther whether of Hebrew or Gentile for it was more to kill a Gentile being free then a Gentile that was a servant or bondman but the master was to die for it if he beat his servant to death so that he died under his hand vers 20. which law must be understood of strangers and aliens that were servants not of Hebrewes for they were not to deale so cruelly with them Levit. 25.38 Iun. much more therefore were they to die if they of purpose killed any free stranger Tostat. 4. If therefore the wilfull murther as well of strangers as Hebrewes be here forbidden then both for the one murther and for the other might they be taken even from the Altar 5. And the reason thereof was this because they which did flee to Gods Altar eum tanquam patronum judicem innocentiae suae implorabani did sue unto God as the patron and Judge of their innocency therefore they therein abusing Gods name were to be expelled thence Gallas QUEST XLIII What manner of smiting of parents is forbidden Vers. 15. HE that smiteth his father and mother c. 1. The very smiting of the father or mother deserveth death although they die not of such smiting Cajetan Iun. as may appeare vers 12. where is directly expressed concerning the smiting of another if hee die then the smiter shall bee put to death Piscator 2. R. Salomon understandeth that this is not meant of every smiting but when upon the smiting âhe effusion of bloud followeth or some scarre or wound is caused But the very smiting of either of the parents sheweth the malice and disobedience of the childe for the which he is worthie to die as Deut. 21.18 the sonne for his stubbornnesse and disobedience was to be stoned to death Indeed for every blow or smiting the childe was not to die if it were done unwittingly or unawares but if it were done of purpose he deserved death 3. And the reason is because of the authoritie of the parents which is the next unto God Simler Deo parentibus non possumus reddere aequalia c. Wee can never make amends unto God and our parents Cajetan As also they seeme not to be worthie of life which are injurious to those by whom they received their life Gallas QUEST XLIV Of the grievous sinne of paricide THough there be no expresse mention here of those that kill their parents yet it followeth necessarily that if it be a sinne worthie of death to smite them much more to kill them 1. This even among the Heathen was counted so hainous a sinne that they thought none so wicked that would commit paricide and therefore Solon
that wise law-maker among the Athenians maketh no mention of paricide nor yet the Romans had any law against such untill the 642. yeare from the building of the Citie which was the 100. yeare before the nativitie of Christ one Publicius Malcolus with the helpe of his servants killed his mother against whom the Citie decreed this punishment that he should be put into a sacke together with a Cocke an Ape a Viper and a Dogge and so cast into the water Tostat. quaest 17. The Egyptians caused such first to be beaten with thornes and then to be burnt with thornes The Macedonians did stone them to death Pelarg. Plato lib. 9. de legibus would have such grievously punished unto death and then to be left unburied 2. It is a like sinne to kill the father as to doe it to the mother yet the father is set before as the more honourable person and fewer examples are extant of those that have killed their fathers than of the other Oedipus is said unwittingly to have killed his father Laius King of Thebes taking him for his enemie But Orestes killed his mother Cliteânestra Agamemnons wife wittingly so did Alcmeon his mother being charged so to doe by his father Amphiaraus being slaine in the Thebane warre to the which his wife perswaded him to goe and therefore being deadly wounded he commanded his sonne to kill her Ninia likewise the sonne of Ninus killed his mother Semiramis after he had carnally knowne her Such beastly examples of paricide Heathen histories afford who not knowing God were without naturall affection and disobedient to parents which were the sinnes of the Heathen Rom. 1.30 Some write that Iudas killed his father and married his mother Tostat. qu. 17. But it is not like that if Iudas had so apparently shewed his wickednesse before that our blessed Saviour would have chosen him to be one of his Apostles QUEST XLV The law of man-stealing expounded Vers. 16. HE that stealeth a man and selleth him or it be found with him c. 1. Some understand if it be found with the buyer that is the man that is stollen be found sold over and delivered to the buyer Oleaster But then there should be a repetition of the same thing for as much was said before and selleth him there cannot be a seller without a buyer 2. Some doe thus expound if it be found that is proved by him that he hath stolen a man So Lyran. Tostat. Vatab Simler and the Latine text expresseth the same sense convictus noxae if he be convicted of the offence But this clause had beene superfluous for this must be understood in all lawes that the offence must be sufficiently proved before it be censured Againe in this sense the law should be imperfect not determining what should become of him that had stolen a man onely and not sold him some say restitution should be made by the like he should give two men for one or give the price of two men But this is no where to be found restitution indeed was to be made in the theft of other things Exod. 22.1 but there was not the like reason for men 3. Therefore the meaning is this that if one steale a man whether he have sold him and delivered him over or if he be found with him as yet unsold in both cases he should suffer death for his malice appeared evidently in the stealing onely that he intended to sell him over Iun. Gallas Osiand So also Lippom. he was to be put to death if the theft were yet found with him propter crudelissimum institutum for his cruell enterprise how much more si desperata fuerit venditi redemptio if being sold he were past redemption 4. By the ancient Romane lawes such men-stealers were condemned to the metal mines by a latter law of Constantine they were to be cast unto the wilde beasts Simler QUEST XLVI The reason why man-stealing was punished by death THe reasons why this kinde of theft in stealing of men was so severely punished with death were these 1. Because man was created according to Gods image therefore in respect of the excellencie and preeminence of the thing that was stolen the punishment ought to be the greater 2. Because by this meanes he that was sold lost his libertie which is as precious as life it selfe and to bring a man into servitude quid aliud quà m sexcentis eum mortibus objicere what was it else than to expose him to an hundred deaths Gallas 3. And beside they could not steale men and sell them to the Israelites but it would bee knowne and therefore it is like that after they had stolen them they sold them over to the Gentiles and so they were in danger that were so sold over to be corrupted in religion and seduced to idolatrie and so drawne away from the service of God and by this meanes be brought into bondage both in soule and bodie Simler The Interlinearie Glosse therefore thus expoundeth diabolo obnoxium fâcerit hath sold him that is brought him into the devils service 4. Of this sinne were Iosephs brethren guiltie in selling him over to the idolatrous Egyptians who therein had a vaine perswasion that they were not guiltie of his bloud because they spared his life but in selling him over to bee a slave and that to an idolatrous people as much as in them lay eum è medio sustulerunt they tooke him away as out of the world Gallasius QUEST XLVII What kinde of cursing of parents is here understood Vers. 17. HE that curseth his father or mother c. 1. There are two kinds of cursing one assumpto Dei nomine when Gods name is taken in vaine withall another is without Borrhaius Lippoman thinketh that this is understood of the first kinde But seeing the blaspheming of the name of God deserved death of it selfe Levit. 24. and this law doth properly punish the cursing and blaspheming of the parents it seemeth generally to be intended against all kinde of cursing and wiâhing evill unto the parents 2. And it seemeth to be understood of an use and custome of cursing not of every railing word which sometime should bee uttered by the childe in rage and heat for every such word to inflict death upon the childe would be thought too hard sed ille qui assuefactus est maledicere patri maetri c. but he that is accustomed to curse his father and mother and that for small matters deserveth death Tostat. as that law against disobedient children Deut. 21.18 is made against those that are incorrigible and are confirmed in their disobedience and stubbornnesse So also Cajetane As he that smiteth them is worthie of death so he that curseth nisi imperfectio actus excuset puta si non deliberato aut leve verbum c. unlesse the imperfection of the act excuse or he speake a light word of railing c. 3. And as cursing to the face of the parents is judged worthie
of death so also publike backbiting and detracting Publice enim detrahens perinde est ac si palam detraheret For he that openly backbiteth his parents is as if he did it to their face but it is otherwise in private backbiting and speaking evill of them for detractor reveretur eum cui detrahit c. the privie detractor doth feare and reverence him whom he speaketh evill of but he that curseth to the face is impudent and shamelesse c. QUEST XLVIII What manner of strife the law meaneth Vers. 18. WHen men strive together 1. As contention is in words so rixa strife properly is in deeds cum ex rixa invicem se percutiunt when striving they fall to blowes Thom. 2. The case is put of men but if either a woman should strike a man and wound him or one woman should hurt another they are subject to the same law Tostat. qu. 19. 3. And this law must be understood of those which strive and fight one with another each offending the other not when one defendeth himselfe one cannot offend another without mortall and grievous sinne but one may defend himselfe without sinne and yet notwithstanding he may sinne sometime more sometime lesse in defending himselfe if he onely seeke in his owne defence to repell the wrong that is offered it is no sinne si cum animo vindictae odii c. If with a minde of revenge and hatred he defend himselfe he sinneth either lesse when he findeth his anger kindled and his patience violated or more when he bindeth himselfe wholly to bee revenged Sic Thom. 2.2 qu. 41. art 1. 4. By smiting with stone or fist is understood all kinde of assaulting one either afarre off with stone arrow dart or such like or neere hand as with sword staffe in the hand Simler or all kinde of hurting either with weapon or instrument or without Tostat. 5. And the law meaneth such hurting where no member was perished for in that case they were to give eye for eye hand for hand foot for foot vers 24. Simler QUEST XLIX What punishment the smiter had if he which were smitten died Vers. 19. IF he rise againe c. then shall he that smote him goe quit 1. That is he shall be freed from the sentence of death though he be not innocent before God nor yet altogether free from all civill punishment for in this case he is to allow his charges for his resting and to pay for his healing 2. But here the doubt is what punishment he should have that in striving so smote his brother that he died of it Cajetane thinketh that in this case he should flie unto one of the Cities of refuge Quia non ex intentione sed ex repentina rixa percussio facta est Because the blow or stroke was given not of purpose but occasioned by a sudden brawle c. But if it had beene so as if death had followed upon such smiting the smiter should goe free so neither death not following but some other hurt that he is constrained to keepe his bed should he have beene taxed so much as with the charges if the taking away of the life in this case had not beene punishable much lesse any lesse hurt being not mortall 3. Therefore I preferre here the judgement of Tostatus that if he which was thus smitten in a fray or brawle died he that smote him was to die whether hee were Hebrew that was so killed or stranger whether bond or free for it was not lawfull for them to kill a Gentile or stranger sojourning among them and if a free man killed a free man or a servant a free man he was to die without all question and if a free man killed anothers servant hee was to die also for if a master killed his owne servant outright he was punished by death vers 20. much more if he killed anothers servant Tostat. quast 19. And that in this case they which in strife killed one another deserved to die it is evident both by the generall law before vers 12. He that smiteth a man that he die shall die the death and by a necessarie consequence here If he rise againe that is smitten and walke he that smote him shall goe quit that is from the punishment of death it followeth then if he doe not rise againe but die that he shall not goe quit QUEST L. What should become of the smiter if the other died after he walked upon his staffe Vers. 19. ANd walke without upon his staffe But what if he die after he hath risen and walked upon his staffe 1. R. Salomon thinketh that the smiter was to bee apprehended and kept till he that was smitten were perfectly recovered and if he did not the other was to die and by walking upon the staffe he saith is meant the perfect recovery of his health as Ezech. 4. the staffe of bread is taken for the vertue and fulnesse of bread by a metaphor But though such metaphoricall speeches are usuall in the Prophets yet in the setting downe of lawes words must be taken in their literall sense Tostat. 2. Therefore because the law saith If he walke without or abroad upon his staffe the other shall goe quit the meaning is though he lie downe upon his bed againe and afterward die yet the other shall goe quiâ and the reason is because after hee sitteth up and walketh and seemeth to be past the danger and falleth downe againe Magis probabile est quod mortuus est âx negligentia c. It is more probable that he died by his owne negligence and carelesnesse in keeping of himselfe or by some other occasion than of the smiting Lyran. 3. But if he did not rise at all from his bed and being risen walked but a little about the house upon his staffe and come not abroad and afterward died then the other should not goe quit Tostat. qu. 20. QUEST LI. Of the equetie of this law in bearing of the charges Vers. 19 HE shall beare his charges for his resting and pay for his healing c. 1. That is he shall pay all manner of charges which he was put unto about his healing as to the Physitians and for the physicke and medicines which he used and for his diet which upon this occasion was extraordinary and so more chargeable Tostat. qu. 22. Likewise he was to beare the charges of the ministers and keepers that attended upon him during the time of his lying Simler 2. The intendment of this law is that full recompence and satisfaction should be made for any dammage or losse which happened unto another and yet so as that such recompence being made the Lord would have one to forgive another that charitie should not be violated nor any grudge or purpose of revenge remaine Oleaster 3. This law was more equall indifferent than that law of the Romans contained in the 12. tables that if any man did beat and batter another he should
pay 25. asses that is so many three farthings which mulct being too easie one Lucius Neratius in a bravery used of purpose âo beat and buffet those with his fists whom he met and caused his man presently to pay him the penaltie of the law whereupon the Pretors of Rome devised to impose a greater mulct and punishment for such assaults and batteries Gâll. lib. 20. ex Calvin Marbach QUEST LII Who should beare the charges if a servant had done the hurt HE shall beare his charges But what if one servant had beaten another or a servant had smitten a free man that hee kept his âed upon it 1. In this case either the master of the servant was to beare the charges or else he was to deliver his servant and he was to serve or to be sold to make it good if hee had not of his owne to make satisfaction as the like order was taken for theft Exod. 21.3 2. But here is a further doubt what if the servant that did the hurt were an Hebrew who could not be sold over for more than six yeares and it might so fall out that there remained but one yeare untill the seventh being the yeare of remission came and so his service for so short a time could not make sufficient recompence The answer is that in this case the servant might be sold to serve six yeares more after the yeare of remission as in the case of theft if hee had not wherewithall of his owne to make satisfaction but for longer than six yeares he could not be sold nor more than once But if the servant were a Gentile he might be absolutely sold over to serve a longer time 3. Now if the charge would not come to the value or worth of six yeares service in this case the servant was to serve no longer than till his service would make sufficient amends as if a mans service for six yeares were esteemed at six pounds and the charges of healing arise to three then the servant was to bee sold over onely to serve three yeares which would countervaile the charge Tostat. quaest 23. QUEST LIII What servants this law meaneth and what kinde of chastisement is forbidden Vers. 20. IF a man smite his servant with a rod c. 1. This law is concerning such servants as were no Hebrewes for them they were not to use so hardly and cruelly Levit. 25.38 neither could the Hebrew servant be said to be their money for hee was not absolutely sold but onely for a time Tostat. 2. This case is propounded if the master smite with a rod or any other thing which is not likely to kill but if he smite him with a sword or casting of a stone or such like if the servant die whether under the masters hand or afterward the master shall be surely punished that is shall die for it because in smiting his servant with a deadly weapon it appeareth that he intended to kill him Simler Tostat. quaest 23. 3. And in case it be evident that the servant die of that beating within a day or two the master was likewise to be punished for it but if as the Hebrew phrase is hee stand a day or two after that is be whole and sound that he may goe about his businesse Simler Nam stare tantândem valet ac vigere omnibus integris membris For to stand is all one as to be perfect and sound in all the parts and members Calvin then the master was free So also expoundeth Procopius Vbi ex vulnere vel verbere convaluerit servus c. Where the servant recovereth of the stripe or wound though he afterward die the master is held to be innocent Likewise Thomas Aquin. Si âasio certa esset lex poenam adhibuit c. If the hurt be certaine and evident the law appointeth a punishment for a maime the losse of his service vers 26. for the death of the servant the punishment of manslaughter but where the hurt is uncertaine the law inflicteth no mulct incertum enim erat âtrum ex percussione mortuus c. For it is uncertaine whether he died of the beating 4. This law for servants was more equall than that cruell custome of the Romanes that give unto masters power over their servants life as in Augustins time Vedius Polliâ used to cast his servants that offended into the fish ponds but afterward this cruell custome was mitigated for Antoninus made a law that hee which killed his servant without cause should die for it as if he had slaine anothers servant Galas And Adrianus the Emperour banished one Vmbra a matron for five yeares for handling her maids cruelly Ex Simler 5. But whereas this law giveth libertie to the master to beat his servants though it were extremely so that death followed not wee must consider that this law requireth not an absolute perfection Sed Deus se accommodaviâ ad ãâã populi c. But God applieth himselfe to the rudenesse of the people tolerating many things among them for the hardnesse of their hearts Galas QUEST LIV. The meaning of this clause For he is his money FOr he is his money 1. That is bought with his money hee seemeth to have punished himselfe sufficiently in the losse of his servant Iun. 2. But if this reason were ãâ¦ã way the ãâã to be punished though his servant died under his hand for hee ãâã iâ his money 3. For answer to this objection a servant is to be considered two wayes as he is a man and as he is made apt and fit âo labour the servant oweth not to his master his life but his labour therefore if the master take away the life of the servant directly as if he die with beating under his hand the master is to be punished for it for as hee loseth a servant so the politike state is deprived of a man and herein hee doth wrong to the Common-wealth But if the master indirectly procure his servants death as in overcharging him with labour in denying him competent food in immodeââte correcting him now the master is not guiltie of his servants death for now puâiââat eum tanquam possessionem suam ut eââenââret he did punish him as his possession and servant to amend and correct him not as a man therefore the reason holdeth in this indirect kinde of killing He is his money c. and not in the other Tostat. quaest 23. QUEST LV. Whether this law meane the voluntarie or involuntarie hurt done to a woman with childe Vers. 22. ALso if men strive and hurt a woman with childe 1. Some Hebrewes thinke that this case here put is of involuntarie hurts and killing as a man striving against his will hurteth a woman with childe and shee dieth for this the man was not to die in their opinion but to redeeme his life with a peece of money Contra. But where any slaughter is committed altogether against ones will as if a man shoot an arrow and kill a
woman with child or shee be behind him and he knew it not and hee hurteth her with his heele that she die in this case the man deserved no punishment at all no not so much as a pecuniary mulct to be inflicted which yet is appointed by this law where death followeth not therefore this law meaneth not any such act which is altogether involuntarie Tostat. quaest 24. 2. Neither is this law to be understood of murther altogether voluntarie as if a man of purpose should smite a woman with child and shee die for this was provided for before what punishment should be laid upon him that committed wilfull murther 3. This law therefore is made concerning such violent acts as were of a mixt kinde partly voluntarie partly involuntarie as if a man striving with one and seeing a woman with child within the danger cared not whether shee was hurt or no Tostat. Or if striving with a man he thrust him upon a woman with child Galas Or a woman comming to rescue her husband receiveth hurt by the other that striveth Lyran. In this case if death followed in the woman with child the ãâ¦ã to die foâ it 4. And the reasons are these 1. Because adfuit laedendi animuâ he that so striveth had a minde and intent to hurt Simler Consilii ratio habenda est his counsell and intention must be considered which was to assault the life of another and by this occasion he killeth one whom he intended not to hurt Iunius Piscator 2. Againe Vxor una carâ est cum viâo quem intendeââ pârâutere The wife is one flesh with her husband whom he intended to smite Lyran. 3. And beside instance is given of a woman with child who neither could shift for her selfe and a double danger is brought both upon her her child which she went with therefore in this case the law provideth that such oversights should be severely punished Tostat. q. 25. QUEST LVI Whether the death of the infant be punished as well as of the mother Vers. 22. ANd death follow not c. 1. Some thinke that this is to be understood onely of the death of the woman and not of the child Osiander That if the child died and not the woman he was onely to pay a peece of money not to lose his life for it and their reason is because he deserved not so great a punishment that killed an infant in the wombe as he that did stay a perfect man Oleaster who findeth fault with Cajetane for understanding the law indifferently of the woman and her child 2. But Cajetanâ opinion is to be preferred for like as it is a more heinous thing to kill a man in his owne house than in the way so is it a prodigious thing to suffocate an infant in the mothers wombe qui nondum est in lucem editus which is not yet brought forth into the light of this world Calvin And againe Foetus quamvis in utero inclusus homo est The infant though yet inclosed in the wombe is a man Simler And the child in the wombe is yet a part of the person of the woman so that if there be corruptioââtius perâoâa aut partis a destruction of the whole person or of a part Iun. he that so hurteth a woman with child in her owne person or her childs is subject to this law QUEST LVII Whether this law extendeth it selfe to infants which miscarie being not yet perfectly formed NOw it being agreed that this law as well comprehendeth the infant that perisheth as the woman that beareth it yet there remaineth a question whether if the childe in the wombe bee yet imperfect and so not endued with sense and life that in this case though the woman die not but onely lose her birth he that did the hurt is to suffer death 1. Some hold the affirmative that if any child whatsoever by this meanes miscarrie the offender is subject to this law ãâ¦ã propââqua est effectui The iâfant being now formed is so neere unto the effect thââ is the life that who causeth the same to miscarrie may be said to have killed a man Gallas And therefore by the Civill law he that of purpose procured the birth to miscarrie if he were a meane person was condemned to the metall mines if a noble person to banishment Cicero also in his oration pro Cluentiâ reporteth of one Milesia a woman who being hired of the heires in reversion to destroy the infant that shee went with had a capitall puishment therefore inflicted upon her Ex Simlero But these lawes were made against such as did of purpose seeke to destroy infants in the wombe and cause abortion of them here the cause is divers where the fruit of the wombe miscarrieth by some chance 2. Therefore this penaltie was onely by the law inflicted when as the infant perished that was endued with life So Augustine thinketh using this reason Nondum potest dici anima viva in eo corpore quod sensu caret c. The living soule cannot be said to be yet in that bodie which wanteth sense qu. 80. in Exod. And thus the Septuagint interpret If the infant came forth ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã not yet formed c. which forming of the infant beginneth fortie dayes after the conception as Procopius Cajetane giveth this reason why in such a case when the birth commeth forth imperfect the sentence of death is not inflicted quia homo in potentia non est homo because a man onely in possibilitie is not a man quia tunc non occiditur homo non est homicidium and because then a man is not killed it is no manslaughter Tostat. And the word jeladim sons signifieth as much that the law meaneth formed and perfect infants Simler And it is put in the plurall because a woman may have more infants than one in her wombe at once for otherwise why should one give life for life or soule for soule seeing such imperfect births are not yet endued with life soule As Augustine saith In Adam exemplum datum est c. An evident example is given in Adam quia jam formatum corpus accipit animam that the bodie when it is now fashioned receiveth the soule and not before For after Adams bodie was made the Lord breathed into him the breath of life So August lib. quaest vet nov Testam qu. 23. as he is alleaged Caus. 32. qu. 2. cap. 9. QUEST LVIII Why the action is given unto the husband Vers. 22. ACcording as the womans husband shall appoint him c. 1. Because the injurie is done unto the man in that his issue is cut off and because hee is the head of the woman the law referreth the prosecution of this wrong unto the husband Tostat. 2. But the taxation of the mulct is so referred to the man as yet if he should exceed a just proportion the Judges in their discretion are to moderate it Gallas 3. Tostatus
thinketh that these were not the ordinarie Judges of the Hebrewes sed arbitri constituti ex voluntate partis utriusque but arbitrators chosen by the will and consent of both parties quest 24. But that part of the law which followeth Thou shalt render life for life which is spoken to the Judge to whom the sword was committed sheweth that this authoritie also of setting the pecuniarie punishment is referred to the civill Magistrate QUEST LIX Whether the law of retalion be literally to be understood Vers. 24. EYe for eye tooth for tooth c. 1. Some doe thinke that this law of retalion is not to be understood according to the letter but an estimation was to be made by money so R. Salomon to whom consenteth Tostatus upon these reasons 1. Because in some of these kinds as if a foot should bee taken from him that perished his neighbours foot it might so fall out that together with the foot hee should lose his life and so there should be more than a retalion 2. And againe in the former law vers 18. where one upon anothers smiting lieth downe on his bed but riseth againe the other was onely to beare his charges there the law of repercussion and retalion tooke no place and so is it to be understood here 3. Favorinuâ thus reasoned against this law of retalion as Aulus Gellius bringeth him in lib. 20. cap. 1. that it was impossible to be kept for if the like should be inflicted for the like as one wound for another they must take heed that the like wound in every respect should be made neither longer nor deeper if it were then a new retalion should bee offered unto the other that prosecuted the action and so there should be no end Contra. 1. The like may bee objected concerning the cutting off of other members as of the eares and hands which are inflicted by the lawes of divers countries for divers times death followeth in the amputation of such parts and yet the law intendeth not death He then may thanke himselfe that deserved such mangling of his members neither is the severitie of the law to give way because of some inconvenience which is feared And yet further thus much may bee added that where in such tetalion death was like to follow where death was not intended that in this case much was left to the discretion of the Judge that compensation might bee made in another kinde as by pecuniarie satisfaction 2. The other instance is not to the purpose for the law speaketh of such hurting when as there is no losse of any member for in that case they are referred to this law but when the body was otherwise hurt and bruised without any corruption of the parts and members then the smiter in that case was to beare his charges that rested and lay upon his bed by his meanes 3. The other objection is frivolous for it was not in the private mans hand that was wounded to make what wound he thought good againe but it was in the Judges power to order it 2. Therefore the more probable opinion is that this law is literally to be understood that he which had spoiled his neighbours eye hand foot should suffer the like himselfe as may appeare by these reasons 1. Because the first clause here set downe vers 23. Thou shalt pay life for life is literally intended not that he should pay mony for his life but he should lose his life indeed 2. Our blessed Saviour so expoundeth this law Matth. 5.38 Yee have heard it hath beene said an eye for an eye c. which libertie being given unto the Magistrate onely every private man did arrogate to himselfe to seeke revenge as he thought good and therefore our blessed Saviour correcteth that error But I say unto you resist not evill c. Now if this retalion and recompence had beene made in money and not in inflicting the like hurt they had not resisted evill or sought revenge 3. Other forren lawes also borrowed this law of retalion from Moses as among the Romanes in their twelve tables this law is extant Si membrum ruperit nisi cum eo pacit talio esto c. If he have broken a member unlesse he agree with him let there be a retalion 3. Yet this law is so literally to be understood as that it was lawfull notwithstanding to turne the like punishment into a pecuniarie mulct Iosephus thinketh it was in his choice that was hurt whether hee would be satisfied in money or have the like punishment inflicted So also Bârrhaius But it is not like that it was left wholly to his choice but that it rested in the Judges discretion as before in another case the womans husband was to set the summe but the Judges were to moderate it vers 22. 4. Therefore it is like that it was in the Judges power to award either the like penaltie or a compensation in money as afterward vers 29.30 If a mans oxe used to gore chanced to kill any the owner was to die or pay a ransome of money And the reasons of this commutation are these The difficultie in the strict law of retalion that it could hardly alwayes be observed according to the letter as if hee were weake and sickly that was to lose a member he was like to lose his life also with it and if a poore man had lost an arme it was more profitable for him to have amends made him in money than to have anothers hand cut off and if the Judge should upon every ones humorous desire have taken away from one an arme or a legge this would have nourished revenge It is like then upon these reasons that the Judges as they saw cause did make a change and commutation of this penaltie with money as the Pretors did among the Romanes 5. Yet although it were in the Judges power to make a commutation of the like punishment with a pecuniarie mulct the law of retalion notwithstanding is set downe 1. Both for more certaintie because one rule could not serve for all pecuniarie taxations which might be aggravated or diminished in the discretion of the Judge according to the divers circumstances 2. As also if a mulct of money had beene set then the mutilation of the members being not warranted by the letter of the law could not have beene inflicted 3. As also this severitie in the amputation or cutting off the like part doth imprint a greater terror than if any summe of money though never so great had beene imposed Simler QUEST LX. Whether the law of retalion were just and equall BUt against the law of retalion it will be thus objected 1. That sometime there may be great inequalitie in the persons and then such equall and like requitall is not just as if a subject should smite a Magistrate and wound him it is not sufficient for the other to be wounded againe And in the law of retalion there is no respect whether one did
the hurt voluntarily or involuntarily but onely ut tantum reddatur pro tanto that so much be rendred for so much but it is not just that if one did hurt another against his will that the like hurt of purpose should be done to him againe Tostat. 2. But these objections may easily bee removed For first this law of retalion must be understood with two reservations that it is given de nocumentis personalibus concerning hurt done unto mens persons but it is otherwise in nocumentis rerum in the damage of ones things or substance for in that case not like is to be rendred for like but at the least double for one sometime more chap. 22.4 The other exception is that these personall wrongs are understood to be personarum non qualificatarum of persons not qualified but of common and ordinarie persons as is evident by the former law vers 15. that he which did smite his father and mother should not be smitten againe but was to die for it Cajetan Secondly this law of retalion must necessarily bee expounded of voluntarie and wilfull hurts for if hee that killed a man against his will was not to bee killed againe vers 13. so neither was hee which had done any hurt unwittingly to his neighbour in any of his parts or members to receive the like againe 3. This law then whatsoever can be objected to the contrarie was most equall those times considered 1. Lex talionis permissa est duro populo c. This law of retalion was permitted unto that hard people Sed charitas fidelium mitigatrix est hujus legis The charitie of the faithfull and beleevers doth mitigate the severitie of this law which teacheth them not to seeke revenge Lippoman 2 And Augustine further sheweth the reason of this law that it was made to moderate the unreasonable desire of men in seeking revenge Nonne videmus homines leviter laesos moliri caedem c. for doe we not see men being but a little hurt to goe about to kill to thirst for bloud c. therefore this law An eye for an eye c. non âomes sed limes furoris est c. is not the kindler but the limiter of rage and revenge Lib. 12. contr Faust. cap. 25. 4. But whereas our blessed Saviour Matth. 5.39 having repeated this law addeth But I say unto you resist not evill c. he doth not abrogate this law but onely freeth it from the corrupt interpretations of the Jewes who hereby tooke unto themselves great libertie in following and fostering private revenge Our blessed Saviour therefore sheweth that privat men should not seeke to revenge their owne wrongs noâ arrogate unto themselves that power which belongeth to the Magistrate who if hee did not right their wrongs they ought with patience rather to beare them than to bee Judges and revengers in their owne case Marbach QUEST LXI Of the servants freedome for the losse of an eye or tooth Vers. 26. IF a man smite his servant c. 1. This law is to bee understood of such servants as were not Hebrewes as may appeare vââs 20. for they were not to use the Hebrew servants so cruelly Levit. 25.38 Tostatus thinketh that if an Hebrew servant received a maime hee was not onely to bee set at libertie for his maime but also some other recompence was to be made beside because hee was to goe out free simply in the seventh yeere But I rather herein subscribe to Lyranus that in this case the former law of retalion was to take place if an Hebrew servant lost either an eye or tooth at his masters hand So also Iunius 2. If either one servant did maime another or a free man anothers servant Tostatus thinketh that in this case the smiter was to buy out his service that was maimed and if he were not able then hee was to serve in his place and this generall rule hee giveth that a quocunque servus percutiatur debet effici liber of whomsoever the servant was smitten hee was to bee made free His reason is because another had not more privilege than the servants master if then he was to bee set at libertie if his master smote him and maimed him much more if another did it Contra. This law onely containeth an exception concerning the master in all other the former law was to stand in force an eye for an eye c. which was no privilege for the stranger more than for the master but a greater punishment the master is privileged and exempted from the law of retalion for if the master should have lost a limme or member for his servant there would never have beene any agreement or accord betweene them afterward Marbach And therefore the law provideth that which was lesse grievous to the master and more beneficiall for the servant that he should have his freedome for his maime Simler Privandi enim sunt dominatu tanquam indigni For they were to bee deprived of their mastership and government as unworthy that could use it no more moderatly Gallas 3. There are foure kinds of smiting 1. When death followed whereof the law is set downe before vers 20. 2. If any limme were perished 3. If a wound were made and bloud followed 4. When no skin was broken but onely the blewnesse of the stripe seene for these two last there was no punishment appointed for the master but onely for the two first the one is provided for before vers 20. the second here Tostat. 4. By these two parts of the eye and tooth here expressed all other parts which might be in like manner blemished are signified Simler Lyranus out of R. Salomon nameth these parts for the which if they were perished the servant was to goe out free the ten fingers the ten toes the eares eyes nose and secret parts And why not also the hands and armes feet and legges as before in part is set downe in the law of retalion vers 24. 5. Procopius and Rabanus doe make this mysticall sense of this law by the eye they understand the minde by the tooth discretionem per quam subtiliter sententias Scripturarum comminuit the discerning whereby one divideth the sentences of Scripture if any doe corrupt the judgement of his servant in matters of religion he must leave such a master and go where he may be better taught But where the literall meaning is plaine such mysticall applications are superfluous QUEST LXII What manner of smiting and goaring of a beast is here understood Vers. 28. IF an oxe goare c. 1. One kinde is put for all à parte totum intelligendum est One kinde of beast is named for the rest what beast soever is hurtfull unto man must thus bee served Augustin qu. 8. in Exod. So also Lyranus And this is agreeable to that law Gen. 9 5. At the hand of every beast will I require your bloud Gallas But the oxe is specially mentioned because the Hebrewes were most
given to keeping of cattell their horse were for the most part brought out of Egypt Simler 2. It is understood to be such a goring and wounding as that death followed upon it for otherwise though one were sore wounded with the push of an oxe if he died not the oxe was not in this case to be stoned Tostat. 3. But that other conceit of Tostatus in this place is not so good secus est si calce petierit c. It is otherwise if the oxe strike with his heele not with his horne in this case the oxe is not to die because it was his fault that stood within the reach of the oxes heele whereas he pursueth after men to gore them with his horne for what saith he then to the horse heele if any were stricken to death therewith was not the horse to be killed by the equitie of this law as Lippoman expoundeth it as well de equo calcitroso of a striking horse as of a pushing oxe If this law provideth for the stroke of the horse heele why not for the oxe hee le also And this is yet more evident Gen. 9.5 that the Lord will require mans bloud at the hand of every beast the heele is as well the oxe hand as his horne By what meanes soever then a beast killeth a man this law was to take place QUEST LXIII Why the oxe that goared was commanded to be stoned to death Vers. 28. THe oxe shall be stoned to death c. 1. Though a bruit beast cannot sinne and therefore this punishment is not inflicted for any sinne committed by the beast yet it is in joyned ad horrorem facti for the horror of the fact Tostat. 2. Quia esset horribilis ad videndum c. Because the sight of such a bloodie beast would be horrible and grievous to men Lyran. 3. And it might be feared lest such a dangerous beast if he should live should kill others also Simler 4. This was also provided for the masters advantage who was bound to make good all losses which should fall out afterward by his beast which used to push Tostat. 5. And by this law men are given to understand that if bruit beasts are not spared much lesse shall they goe unpunished if they shed mans bloud Gallas 6. The equitie also of this law herein appeareth that sicut creati sunt boves in hominum gratiam c. That as oxen were created for mans sake so they should serve for the use of man whether by their life or death Calvin 6. Agreeable to this law of Moses as grounded upon the law of nature were the like constitutions among the Heathen as Solon made a law in Athens that if a dogge had bitten a man hee should be tied in an halter and delivered to him that was hurt So among the Romanes in their 12. tables it was decreed that if a beast had done any hurt Dominus aut litis astimationem solvito aut eam noxa dedito The owner should either pay aâ was awarded or deliver up his beast to punishment Draco also was the author of this law in Athens that not onely men but beasts yea things without life that had beene the meanes of any mans death should be banished out of the countrie and cast out whereupon the image of Theogenes among the Thrasians falling upon one and killing him was adjudged to be cast into the Sea Simler QUEST LXIV Why the flesh of the oxe was not to be eaten ANd his flesh shall not bee eaten 1. It was neither lawfull for them to eat the flesh themselves nor yet to sell it to the Gentiles as they might doe other things that died alone Deut. 1â 21 Iun. But the flesh should be cast away as a cursed and abominable thing 2. Not so much because being stoned to death it was as a thing suffocated and so they should have eaten it with the bloud Simler Osiander But tanquam aliquid maledictum c. as a thing accursed they were to abhorre the flesh of such a bloudie beastâ so that although the owner should slay this murtherous oxe before it were stoned it was not lawâull to eat the flesh thereof Tostat. quaest 30. 3. And this was tum propter horrorem factâ both for the horror of the fact tum quia per hoc damnificabatââ Dominus bovis and by this meanes also the owner of the oxe was damnified the flesh thereof being unprofitable for any thing that he might be more âautelâââ afterward and take better heed to his cattell Lyranus 4. The Hebrewes addâ further that the very skin of the oxe was not to be used to any purpose but the whole to be cast away as a thing abominable Tostat. quaest 28. QUEST LXV In what case the owner is to die when his oxe goared any to death Vers 29. IF the oxe were wont to push c. Another case is put when the oxe chanceth to doe any hurt with the masters knowledge where divers conditions are required 1. That the oxe used to push before the words are in the originall yesterday and yeâ yesterday a definite time is put for an indefinite it is noâ enough if he had once goared before but he must have one it twice at the least as R. Salomon Lyran. He must have beene knowne in former time to have beene used to push 2. This also must have beene notified and signified also to the owner for it may be that the oxe had used formerly to push and the owner knew it not Simler Or if he knew it he might denie it unlesse he had beene admonished by others to take care of his beast Tostat. quaest 28. 3. He or she must be free and not a servant whom the oxe used to push goareth to death for concerning the goaring of servants there followeth another law afterward vers 32. If the oxe goared a man or woman a sonne or daughter that is though they were never so little it was all one Lyran. Some thinke it is understood of the owners owne sonne and daughter Calvin Oleaster But the next law as touching the goaring of servants sheweth that it is rather meant of his neighbours sonne or daughter Hugo de S. Victor But it is rather understood in generall de quo viâ capite libero of every free bodie great or small man or woman Iun. 4. In this case the owner being warned before of his oxe is to die for it because he did not keepe him in knowing him to be a harmefull beast Quia videtur illud quasi immittere aliorum cervicibus because he seemed of purpose to let him loose to doe mischiefe Simler QUEST LXVI When the owner might redeeme his left with money Vers. 30. IF there be set to him a summe of money 1. R. Salomon thinketh that in this case the next of kin to the partie slaine were to take a peece of money of the owner of the oxe and they could not refuse but might be compelled to take it and
so he taketh here si if for quia because Contra But the very letter of the law is against this exposition for it is expresly said The oxe shall be stoned and the owner shall die also But if the owner might at his libertie redeeme his life with money then he should never be put to death and so that clause of the law should be superfluous Tostat. quaest 29. 2. Neither yet is Tostatus opinion here to be received Quandoque posuit in electione cognatorum c. That the law doth put it in the choice of the kinsmen of the slaine when they would demand the owner to die and when they thought good to set him a summe of money and so hee maketh this a different case from that vers 22. where the Judges were to set the summe of money because it was no capitall offence but here he is to pay whatsoever is required by the adversarie part without any moderation or limitation of the Judges because the offence being capitall cannot be valued or esteemed by any certaine summe of money Tostat. quast 28. Contra. But this is not like that this was left to the choice of the adversaries for either they might set such an unreasonable summe which the owner was not able to pay or else might use partialitie that in the very like case some owner should die when another should escape with his life and so the law should not be equall and indifferent to all 3. Some thinke that it was in the Judges discretion to change the sentence of death into a pecuniary mulct concedit lâx quòd possit Iudex decernere c. The law alloweth the Judge to determine c. Cajetan Lippoman thinketh that the adversaries were to make the demand praevia tamen non iniqui Iudiciâ moderatione c. yet by the moderation of an indifferent Judge going before But if it were altogether arbitrarie in the Judge when a man should die in this case when not to what end saith the law The owner shall die also In that case then there propounded he was certainly to die which sentence by the Judge could not be dispensed with 4. Therefore I thinke rather with Iunius that in this mitigation of the former sentence of death a divers case is put from the former that if the owner of the oxe non satis scivit did not sufficiently know it vel non satis cavit or did not take heed enough thinking he had sufficiently provided for his beast that in this case he might be excused Si simplick as vel incogitantiâ hominem excusaâât if the mans simplicitie or forgetfulnesse did excuse him c. so that he were not found to be wilfully negligent and carelesse the Judge might set him at a summe of money Calvin QUEST LXVII What servants this law meaneth Hebrewes or strangers Vers. 32. IF the oxe goare a servant or maid 1. Some thinke this is generally meant of all servants among the Hebrewes where lesse respect is had unto servants than unto free men Vt cura libertatis major vigeret in populo Dei c. That there should be more care had of libertie among the people of God that they come not through their owne default into servitude and bondage Lippoman 2. But it is rather understood of such servants as were Gentiles and strangers and not Hebrewes as may appeare by the former lawes vers 20.26 which are onely referred unto that kinde of servants Iun. For in all kinde of percussions and wrongs offred to the bodie or life the Hebrew servants had the same privilege which free men had Againe Tostatus addeth this reason because if he were an Hebrew servant that was killed the money should not be given to his master but so much onely as his service remaining might be valued at the rest was to goe rather to his children or kindred as put the case that his service were esteemed at foure sicles yearly and there remained but one yeare of his service before the seventh yeare came then his master was to have but foure sicles of the thirtie sicles But because the Gentile servants were their masters perpetuall possession the whole summe which the servant was valued at that perished belonged unto them Tostat. quaest 3. QUEST LXVIII Why a certaine summe of money is set for all servants Vers. 32. HE shall give unto their masters thirtie sicles The common sicle weighed the fourth part of an ounce of silver so that thirtie sicles made seven ounces and an halfe that is so many dolleââ seven crownes starling and an halfe Iun. which is about 37.s. 6.d. of our money Now although there was great difference in the price of servants for the men servants were more worth than the maids and the young and strong than the old and weake yet a certaine rate is set for these reasons 1. Some thinke this proportion and summe is named because out of Cham there issued thirtie generations Gen. 7. from whom servitude tooke beginning But this is but a figurative reason which rather belonged to the ceremoniall than to the politike lawes Tostat. quaest 29. 2. These reasons rather may bee yeelded 1. That whereas the summe for the death of a free man is arbitrarie vers 30. but the certaine quantitie is named for a servant slaine by a beast this was to shew a difference betweene servants and free men Cajetan 2. Quia caedes erat involuntaria c. Because this slaughter was involuntarie and the owners negligence onely is punished therefore one servant is not set at an higher rate than another Simler 3. And beside this moderate and indifferent price is taxed that the owner of the oxe and the master of the servant might as it were divide the losse betweene them that seeing it was done of negligence non multum gravaretur in solvendo Dominus bovis The owner of the oxe should not be burthened with over great payment Tostat. quaest 29. QUEST LXIX What kinde of wells this law meaneth where and by whom digged Vers. 33. WHen a man shall open a well or digge a pit c. 1. Here are two cases put when either one uncovereth a well digged alreadie or diggeth a new well and leaveth it uncovered then he is subject to this law Lyran. For if one made a well and left it covered and another commeth and uncovereth it though he made it not now he is in fault and not the other that made it quia causam immediatam tribuit malo because hee is the immediate cause of the evill or mischiefe that is done Tostat. qu. 30. 2. Rab. Salomon thinketh that if the master commanded another to make a well and leave it uncovered that in this case he is not to make good the losse but he that made it Contra. If he that made it were a servant who could not gainsay his masters commandement in this case the master was rather to be charged with the penaltie than the servant because he was the cause but if
how the Lord is affected to the seventh day of rest that in remembrance thereof he also privileged the seventh yeare for the freedome of servants and the fiftieth yeare of Jubile Oleaster Whereby we are taught religiously to consecrate unto Gods honour the seventh day 2. Doct. Of Gods providence even in such things as seeme to fall out by chance Vers. 13. BVt God hath offred him into his hand Discamus non casuâ aut fortunae istos occursus attribuere sed providentiae supremi Iudicis c. Let us learne saith Cajetane hereupon to attribute such occurrents not unto chance or fortune but unto the providence of the highest Judge Even these accidents which seeme to fall out by chance are ruled and governed by the providence of God as our blessed Saviour saith that even our haires are numbred and therefore nothing can happen unto us otherwise than as God disposeth 3. Doct. The fact is to be measured by the minde of the doer Vers. 13. IF a man have not laid wait Vides externa facta non esse judicanda juxta externam facti speciem c. You see that outward facts are not to bee judged according to the externall shew sed juxta internum facientis animum but according to the inward minde and purpose of the doer Lippom. As God saith to Abimelech when he had taken Sara Abrahams wife I know that thou didst this even with an upright minde Genes 21.6 4. Doct. In all wrongs there must be satisfaction and restitution made Vers. 19. HE shall beare his charges The injurie must be freely forgiven but yet there must be recompence and satisfaction made for the losse and hindrance so likewise vers 34. The owner shall make it good The law sheweth that restitution must be made for the hurt and damage made unto another Oleaster Therefore a man cannot looke for remission of his trespasse from God which he hath committed against his neighbour where he refuseth to make him amends it being in his power so did just Zachtus restore fourefold whatsoever he had wrongfully gotten Luk. 19.8 5. Places of confutation 1. Confut. Of the Anabaptists that denie the use of the sword unto the Civill Magistrate Vers. 14. THou shalt take him from mine Altar that he may die This place doth authorise and warrant the lawfull power of the Civill Magistrate in the use of the sword against the error of the Anabaptists which would altogether deprive the Magistrate of it urging that place in the Gospell Matth. 5.39 I say unto you resist not evill But here our blessed Saviour repealeth not the law of Moses An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth but onely reverseth the corrupt exposition of the Pharisies which by this text would give warrant unto privat men to seeke their owne revenge whereas the law giveth this power onely unto the Civill Magistrate So the Apostle also saith that the Magistrate heareth not the sword for nought for he is the minister of God to take vengeance on him that doth evill Rom. 13.4 2. Confut. Against the Papists that would exempt Ecclesiasticall persons from the Civill power Vers. 14. THou shalt take him from mine Altar Even the Priest ministring at the Altar if he had committed wilfull murther might be taken from thence and put to death by the Magistrate as R. Salomon noteth wherein appeareth the soveraigne right and power which then the Civill Magistrate had over the Priests of the law which Tostatus granteth but he saith that herein there was great difference betweene the Priests of those times and of ours and thereupon he putteth this note in the margen Nota differentiam inter Sacerdotes veteris Testamenti nova legis note a difference betweene the Priests of the old Testament and of the new law Tostat. quaest 16. Contra. 1. But herein is no difference at all for the Ministers of the Gospell are no more exempted now from the Civill power than the Priests were then for the Apostle saith Let every soule be subject to the higher power Rom. 13.1 In this generall speech none are excepted yea our blessed Saviour who might have pleaded a greater privilege in this behalfe then any refused not to pay tribute for avoiding of offence Matth. 17.27 See more of this question Synops. Centur. 1. err 98. 3. Confut. Against the great abuse of Popish Sanctuaries FRom mine Altar This sheweth that the Temple and Altar as also the Cities of refuge were privileged places for some kinde of offenders though not for wilfull murtherers Here then somewhat would be inserted concerning the great abuse of Sanctuaries and privileged places in times past 1. Concerning the beginning and first occasion of them it is grounded upon and derived from the judiciall constitutions of Moses who by Gods appointment assigned certaine Cities of refuge for some offenders to flee unto but not for all malefactors from Moses the Gentiles seemed to borrow the like custome in giving immunitie and privilege to some places As in Athens Hercules nephewes builded the Temple of Mercie and obtained for the same this privilege that they which fled thither for succour should not by violence be taken thence In Rome Remus and Romulus betweene the tower and the Capitol appointed a place of refuge called intermontius betweene the hilles after that the Temples and Altars and then the images of the Emperours were privileged to give protection to those which fled thither for succour And from this example came the like immunities which were given afterward to the Churches of Christians which was afterward enlarged unto Church-yards and Monasteries As this reason is alleaged in the Imperiall constitutions of Theodos. and Valentin that because the Gentiles gave such honour to their Idoll temples c. Quantum oportet praesidii ad sacratissimas aras confugientibus praestare How much reliefe ought we to yeeld to those which flie to the most holy Altars The same reason is yeelded Concil Matiscin 2. can 8. Simundani Principes suis legibus censuerunt c. If worldly Princes have decreed by their lawes that whosoever did flee unto their images should be without hurt how much should he remaine undemnified qui suae gremium matris Ecclesia petierit c. which goeth to the bosome of his mother the Church 2. Now for the convenient and necessarie use of such Sanctuaries and privileged places these reasons are brought 1. That they which were innocent as in the case of involuntarie killing might rescue themselves from the rage of the pursuers 2. They which were oppressed by unequall Judges might finde shelter here till either the Judges wrath were appeased or a more indifferent Judge found 3. Such places served for the reliefe of servants that were cruelly handled of their masters 4. And for such as were endebted and were pursued of their cruell creditours and exactours 5. And in time of warre such places were of speciall use that they which fled thither might be preserved from the sword As
and ãâã 2. And beside the facility easinesse and readinesse of theft other things are to be respected as the worth and price of the thing stollen and the boldnesse and impudency of the theefe 6. Wherefore these reasons rather may be yeelded 1. Quia frequântius furtâ subtraâebantur ãâã It might be that it was a more frequent and usuall thing to steale oxen among the Hebrewes than sheepes and therefore God would restraine the more usuall theft by the greater punishment Tostat. 2. In hâc dominium majus âadacia major In this theft of oxen the losse was greater to the owner when his exe was stollen and the boldnesse of the theefe greater ãâ¦ã esse Such a theefe as should steale oxen had need be bold and cunning because such a theft cannot so easily be hid as of sheepe 3. Ab. Ezra also giveth this reason because when a sheepe is stollen the owner loseth but his sheepe but in the other theft ãâ¦ã he loseth his oxe and the labour of his oxe this reason also is approved by Oleaster ãâã Gallasâââ But Tostatus taketh this exception that iâ the losse of the oxeus labour âe accounted here in the restitution of five-fold why should it not be respected as well when the thing stollen is found with the theefe in which âase he was to pay but two-fold qu. 2. The answer here is ready because where the oxe is found though thââe âe an intermission of his labour yet there is hope of restitution againe so is there not here the oxe being killed or sold. 7. Iosephus thinketh that this Law extendeth it selfe also to other cattell in the fields as to goats as well as sheepe though they be not here ãâã But concerning the asse or horse because they are not so easily stollen being kept in the house Tostatus thinketh that the Law of two-fold restitution tooke place as in the stealing of houshold stuffe and other moveable goods But it is more like recording to the rule observed before in other Lawes that by one kinde the rest are understood and these two the oxe and sheepe are given ân âssistance as the most usuall and common beasts unto which all other great and small cattell should be reduced as afterward vers 4. direct mention is made of the asse QUEST III. Of the divers punishment of theft and whether it may be capitall NOw concerning the punishment of theft 1. The licentious liberty of the Lacedemonians is much to be misliked who punished not theft at all because they thought it was a meanes to traine and exercise their people in the practice of warre Gallas for it being a Morall law Thou shalt not steale and so grounded upon the Law of nature it ought not by any contrary custome to be discontinued 2. Neither is that Law of Solââ which the Romans also inserted into their twelve Tables to be altogether approved aâââing opposite to Moses Law for they punished manifest theft with foure-fold when the theefe was taken in the manner whereas Moses setteth it but at two-fold and theft not manifest when the theefe is not found with the thing that was stollen they censured with restitution of two-fold whereas Moses chargeth such offence with foure-fold because such an one as hath sold or killed the stollen good hath added sinne to sinne having no purpose of restitution nor there being any possibility thereof Herein therefore the Law of Moses is more equall than the other 3. The Law also of Draco is too severe which punished theft with death the Scythians did so also but they had some reason for it because they had no houses or places of defence for their cattell so that if theft among them had not beene most severely punished nothing could have beene safe 4. Nor yet am I of their opinion that thinke that lex Mosis non pertinet ad politiam nostram the Law of Moses doth not at all belong to the policie of Common-wealths now Lippom. Non sumus alligati ad leges Iudaicas forenses That we are not bound how to the Jewes Civill lawes at all Osiand but that Magistrates may increase the externall punishment whether by death or otherwise as the circumstance of time quality and condition of the people require Contra. 1. As we are not strictly tied in every point to Moses Judicials so yet the equity thereof remaineth still which chiefly consisteth in this in the due measuring and weighing of the nature of sinnes which are thought to be worthy of death 2. Punishments externall may be increased which concerned either pecuniary mulcts or other bodily chastisement not touching the life as Moses punished theft with foure-fold but afterward the sinne increasing it was set at seven-fold Prov. 7.31 Pelarg. 3. But whereas mans life is only at Gods disposition this may be safely affirmed that no humane Law can take away the life of man for any offence without either generall or particular warrant and direction from Gods Law as is more at large before declared p. 4 5. 5. And yet I cannot consent to those that thinke no theft at all ought to be punished by death for even by Moses Law a violent theft as in breaking up of an house was judged worthy of death it was lawfull to kill such a theefe vers 2. Againe sacrilegious theft was likewise punished in the same manner as Iakob giveth sentence that they should not live that had stollen Labans gods Gen. 31.32 So Achan was put to death for stealing the excommunicate thing Iosh. 7. Theft committed of wantonnesse and without mercie David adjudgeth unto death 2 Sam. 12. vers 6. Chrysostome thinketh that David legem est praetergressus exceeded the Law in that he commandeth beside the restitution of foure-fold the man to be slaine and he calleth it supereffluentem justitiam overabounding justice But the Law of God did beare out David in it for he which did sinne presumptuously and with an high hand that is of malice and obstinacie was to dye for it Numb 15.30 Such was the sinne of the rich man whose case there is propounded which having many sheepe himselfe tooke away the poore mans sheepe by violence and had no pity Further he that did steale a man was to dye for it by the Law of Moses vers 16. So that it is evident even by Moses Judiciall lawes that some kinde of theft deserved death By the Romane Lawes also as is extant in their 12. Tables servants convicted of manifest theft were first beaten and then cast downe headlong from the rocke By the Imperiall lawes a theefe for the first offence was whipped then if he offended againe he lost his eares and the third time he was hanged in Anithent ut nulli Iudici c. for now such a theefe sinneth of obstinacie and malice and contempt against the Lawes and Magistrate and may by the Law of God be worthily put to death Simler So likewise such thefts whereby the publike peace and safety is violated as in the Campe
fault otherwise not as si fecisset animal illud nimis laborare if he caused the beast which was borrowed to be over laboured Lyran. But in the case of borrowing he is bound not only to make restitution where any thing is lost by his fraud and wilfull default sed tenetur de levissima culpa but for every small fault oversight or negligence is he bound to make satisfaction Tostat. qu. 8. QUEST XX. Whether the fornicator by this Law be sufficiently punished Vers. 16. IF a man entise a maid not betrâthed c. 1. This Law enjoyning only unto the fornicator marriage with the virgin corrupted if her father consent may seeme to be too easie and gentle But here it must be considered that in these civill Lawes the punishment is not alwayes answerable to the sin for even the sinne of fornication is one of those which without Gods mercy excludeth out of the kingdome of heaven but the intendment of this Law is to bridle such inordinate lusts and to restraine them that they still increase not Simler 2. And beside it must be considered multa pro ruditate populitâlerare that many things in that Common-wealth were tolerated because of the rudenesse of the people Gallas 3. Although the offender by this meanes doe satisfie the politicke Law in marrying the virgin by him corrupted yet coram Deo c. in the presence of God he is not cleared from this offence in making amends by marriage and giving her a dowry Osiander But repentance beside is necessary for the expiation of this sinne 4. The speciall scope of this Law is to provide for the virgin thus abused that shee being made by this meanes unapt for any marriage with another should be taken to be his wife that had done her this wrong 5. The like Law there was among the Athenians that he which defiled a maid should take her to be his wife But among the Romans there was a more severe Law that he which had committed fornication if he were of good sort should be punished in the losse of halfe his goods if of base condition he should be banished Simler 6. This Law is onely concerning virgins not betrothed for to lye with them which were espoused to another was death by Moses Law Deut. 22.23 QUEST XXI Why the women committing fornication be not as well punished by the Law AGaine this Law may seeme to be defective as in laying so easie a punishment upon the man so imposing none at all upon the woman 1. But the reasons thereof may be these the woman might be entised and deceived upon hope of marriage and it was sufficient punishment unto her the losse of her virginity and beside being under her fathers power and so having nothing of her owne shee could not be charged to pay any summe of money as the man is Simler 2. Yet the high Priests daughter if shee played the whore in her fathers house was to be burned because shee had dishonoured her fathers house Levit. 21.9 therefore she is to be excepted out of this Law Tostat. quaest 9. 3. The word patah here used signifieth to decline or turne so that whether he entise the maid blanditiis vel mendaciis by faire promises or by lying words whether he promised her marriage or not he is bound by this Law to take her to wife Oleaster 4. And as this Law is meant for the one party of virgins not betrothed so is it intended on the other part that he must be a single man that is by this Law enjoyned to marry her Iun. If he were married it seemeth he was rather to endow her than marry her because the father would not willingly consent to give his daughter to one that was married already 5. The word shacab signifieth to lye or sleepe non est peccatum dormire cum puella it is no sinne saith Tostatus only to sleepe with a maid if no other thing be committed though he follow the Latine text reading and sleepe with her it is better therefore to read lie with her Iun. Vatab. QUEST XXII What kinde of dowry this Law speaketh of HE shall endow her There is difference betweene Dos the dowry and donatiâ propter nuptias the marriage gift or joynture this is not meant of the joynture which the man should make his wife but of the dowry which the father used to give in marriage with his daughter as may appeare by these reasons 1. The endowing of the wife is inflicted hâre as a punishment the man for his fault is enjoyned to doe that which otherwise he was not bound to doe but the husband alwayes bestowed upon his wife a marriage gift therefore this Law meaneth he shall beare also her dowry which his wife should bring with her or her friends give with her 2. If it were understood of the joynture or marriage gift it had beene superfluous to say he shall endow her and take her to wife for in taking her to wife the husband was of ordinary course to bestow on her a marriage gift or joynture 3. If he have her not to wife her father not consenting yet he was to pay her dowry vers 17. that is not a joynture or marriage gift but that portion which her friends used to give with her Tostat. qu. 9. QUEST XXIII How this Law differeth from that Deut. 22.29 SOme make this Law all one with that Deut. 22.29 where the man which defiled a maid is enjoyned to pay 50. sicles to her father which R. Salomon thinketh to be the certaine dowry of a virgin and so they say that there is duplex dos una qua datur uxori alia quae datur patri a double dowry one which is given unto the wife the other unto her father Lyran. Simler Gallas Lippom. But these two appeare to be divers Lawes 1. This case is put when a man entiseth a maid and she consenteth and is willing therewith but there the Law speaketh of the violent taking of a maid Iun. Tostat. 2. There the summe of 50. sicles is paid to the father for the wrong done unto his daughter it is not given in the name of a dowry for there could not be any certaine rate or summe of money appointed for every maids dowry some might give 1000. sicles with their daughter others not thirty therefore that summe of 50. sicles is not prescribed here but it is said in generall He shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins that is according to their state and condition as dowries used to be given with virgins and maids of like parentage calling and birth for a poore maid had not so great a dowry as one of noble stocke and high degree 3. The maid by violence first defiled and then taken to wife by that Law could never be put away Deut. 22.30 but no such thing is mentioned here he that taketh a maid to wife whom with her owne consent he before defiled might according to the generall liberty then
permitted Deut. 24.1 if there seemed unto him cause after put her away and the reason of this difference may be this he that taketh a wife willingly will not put her away without cause but he that taketh her against his minde never loved her and so upon every occasion would be ready to send her away whether there were cause or not if he were not by Law restrained of his liberty Tostat. qu. 10. QUEST XXIV What was to be done if the fornicatour were not sufficient to pay the dowrie HE shall endow her c. But what if the man which had committed this wrong to a maid were not able to endow her the question is what course was then to be taken 1. If he were a free man and an Hebrew he was to be sold as in the case of theft vers 3. and to serve so many yeeres as might raise this stocke or dowry for the maid but longer than for six yeeres he could not be sold for all Hebrewes were to be set free in the seventh 2. If he were a free Gentile he might be sold for his life or for so many yeeres as sufficed to make up the dowry 3. If he were an Hebrew servant if his master refused to pay so much money as might serve for the dowry then he was to deliver up his servant to be sold over for so many yeeres as might recompence the dowry before the yeere of remission came and if the yeeres which remained were not sufficient he might be sold over againe 4. If he were a stranger or Gentile being a servant then he might be set over to serve his whole life Tostat. quaest 12. QUEST XXV What if the fornicatour refused to take the maid to wife BUt yet further it will be enquired what if the maids father would consent and yet the party will neither take her nor endow her 1. By the Civill lawes if he be a noble person he should be banished that had defloured a virgin if of base condition he should be whipped and if they ravished a maid against her will in that case they were to suffer death By the Canon lawes if one refused to marry her whom he had defiled he was to be throughly whipped and excommunicate and enjoyned penance till he had fully satisfied 2. And though this be omitted in Moses Law yet so much may be inferred and collected by the letter of the Law that as he was necessarily to endow her for the future of the Indicative moode semper inducit dispositionem necessariam doth alwayes imply a necessary disposition so he was of necessity to marry her like as in another case of forcing a maid he was to be compelled to take her to wife and never to put her away Deut. 22.30 Tostat. quaest 11. QUEST XXVI Whether this Law were generall without any exception NOw although this Law be propounded generally if a man entice a maid he was to endow her and marry her yet there were some exceptions to be made 1. For whereas the Israelites were charged to take them wives out of their owne tribe Numb 36. it is evident that if the maid were of another tribe then the man could not take her to wife but because this case was very rare and unusuall seeing the tribes after they were setled in Canaan when these Lawes were to take place dwelt every one apart by themselves and so there was no feare of such unlawfull entercourse and commixtion betweene a man and maid of divers tribes the Law therefore is silent in this point for ad ea qua raro accidunt jura non adaptantur lawes are not applied to those cases which fall out seldome 2. If he were a Gentile and a stranger of another religion which committed this sinne with a maid neither could she in this case bee given him to wife because they were forbidden to make marriages with such Deut. 7.3 And the Israelitish women were to match in their owne tribe and therefore not with strangers 3. If an Hebrew servant had trespassed herein neither could he have the maid to wife whom he had abused for he was first to endow her which a servant could not doe for either he had fold himselfe into servitude because he was poore or was sold by the Magistrate to make satisfaction for some offence which he had committed and therefore being poore he had not wherewithall to endow her and so could not take her to wife 4. Beside if it were the Priests daughter with whom he had wrought this folly she could not become his wife for she was in this case to be burned Levit. 21. And the man likewise by equity of the same Law being guilty of the same offence 5. Yea if the high Priest himselfe had defloured a maid he could not take her to wife because he was forbidden by the Law to marry any polluted or an harlot Levit. 21. vers 14. 6. If also one had defiled a maid neere of his kin being within the degrees of marriage forbidden they were both to suffer death for it Levit. 20. and therefore could not marry together This Law therefore being generally propounded must yet be interpreted and expounded according to other Lawes for they must all be made to agree together Tostat. qu. 12. QUEST XXVII How farre this positive Law against fornication doth binde Christians now ANd as this Law did not hold generally in the old Testament so neither is it now necessary that whosoever hath committed fornication should be compelled to marry the maid so abused 1. For though it were admitted that this Judiciall and positive Law of Moses were in force still yet some exceptions must needs be admitted as if they are to neere of kin for no such marriage can be allowed within the limited degrees As Saint Paul willed the young man that had committed fornication with his fathers wife to be excommunicate for that fact 1 Cor. 5. he was not suffered to marry her Againe if a Christian maid should commit fornication with an Infidell with a Turke Jew or Heretike in this case the rule of the Gospell will not allow marriage for Christians must marry only in the Lord 1 Cor. 7.39 therefore not with those which are blasphemers of God and enemies to true religion and the Apostle saith Be not unequally yoked with Infidels 2 Cor. 6.14 2. But Tostatus bringeth in two other exceptions as if the maid defiled be either a professed Nunne and so devoted to Monasticall and single life or the man entred into orders unto the which the vow of single life is annexed in neither of these cases can saith he marriage be admitted after fornication committed Tostat. quaest 12. Contra. But against both these exceptions I will oppose the holy judgement of the Apostle and touching the first I urge that Apostolicall saying It is better to marrie than to burne 1 Cor. 7.9 If then Nunnes are subject to this burning as it appeareth they are by their secret
by externall objects useth to tempt men thereby stirring and provoking their natural lust as David was inflamed at the sight of faire Bathsheba but here needeth no other sorcerie or inchantment than the corrupt inclination of a mans owne affection the devill doth but offer the occasion and shew the object hee draweth not the affection but the corruption of the heart of it selfe is ready to apprehend and lay hold of the object set before it Another way there is whereby the affection is stirred as when the evill spirit entereth and possesseth any with madnesse and phrensie for the time not changing the understanding or will but troubling the vitall spirits and inflaming the blood and so incensing unto lust The third way is when Satan entreth not to disquiet the bodie and trouble the spirits but externally offereth violence transporting and carrying by Gods permission bodies from place to place which is no hard thing for Satan to doe and so hee may bring one to the place where their lover is Tostat. qu. 13.3 But here two things are to be considered 1. That Satan directly cannot worke upon the heart of any in the immediate change or alteration of their affections but hee doth it by meanes either externall in moving by objects or by internall provocation and stirring of carnall lust 2. That he hath not the like power over the servants of God which he exerciseth over carnal men which are his owne vassals he ruleth in the children of disobedience as he listeth as the Apostle saith They are taken of him at his will 2 Tim. 2.26 But the faithfull doe resist him by faith 1 Pet. 5.9 So that his tentations cannot fasten upon them to intangle them further than God shall see it good for the triall of their faith This is made evident by that storie of Iustina the Virgin whom Cyprian then a dissolute young man and given to Art Magicke but afterward a most holy and constant Martyr loved exceedingly and when he was not able to prevaile with her by any allurements hee called for the Devils helpe to bring her unto him who by faith chased the evill spirit away Ex Tostat. qu. 13. QUEST XXXII Whether witches can indeed effect anything and whether they are worthie to bee punished by death NOw further by this sentence of the law which adjudgeth witches worthie of death they are found to be in error which thinke that witchcraft is nothing but nudum phantasma a verie phantasie that sillie women imagine they doe things which indeed they doe not but in their owne conceit and imagination First I will examine the objections which are made in the defence or at the least the excuse of these wicked women and in favour of them for the mitigation of their punishment 1. They say that this law is made de veneficis of such as kill and destroy by secret poisons and noysome herbes it concerneth not witches Answ. 1. Indeed the Septuagint reade ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and the Latine translateth maleficos workers of mischiefe but they are both in error for the Hebrew word mecashephah is put in the feminine whereas they both interpret it by the masculine And the word mecashphim is applied to those which worke by evill spirits and have confederacie with them as Exod. 7.10 it is given to the Egyptian Sorcerers and Magicians 2. The practice of poisoning belongeth to the sixth Commandement Thou shalt not kill whereas witchcraft here forbidden is a breach of the first Table Simler 2. These sillie women can effect nothing they imagine they doe many things but it is only in their owne conceit Answ. 1. True it is that they cannot effect what they would for the Lord restraineth the power of the devill by whom they worke as he did when the Sorcerers attempted to bring forth lice and could not Exo. 8. 2. Yet it cannot bee denied but that they effect many strange things by the operation of the devill as the Magicians of Egypt could turne their rods into the similitude of Serpents and water into the likenesse of blood and the witch at Endor could cause the likenesse of Samuel to appeare which was not in deed Samuel but the devill taking upon him his shape So it is no strange thing by the operation of Satan when they take a mans garments and beat them to cause the bodie of the man to feele the smart Simler 3. And if they did no hurt and could effect nothing why was this law ordained against them God gave no superfluous or unnecessarie lawes to his people nor without great reason 4. Though they should effect nothing yet their wicked desire and endevour thereunto is worthie to bee punished 3. Witches many times doe good and heale men of their infirmities and diseases therefore they deserve no such punishment Answ. 1. Indeed in the Civill law such a decree is extant made by Constantine Qui per incantationes intemperiem aeris grandinis evertit puniendus non est c. Hee which by inchantment turneth away the intemperate season of the aire and weather is not to bee punished But it is no marvell that such things were tolerated then when they came newly from Gentilisme wherein such things were not only suffered but honored and rewarded 2. We have a more perfect rule out of the Scriptures that no such unlawfull meanes are to bee used no not to a good end as to procure health or such like for this cause the Prophet reproved the King of Israel having received hurt by a fall because he sent to the god of Ekron for helpe And to this purpose Augustine saith well as he is cited in the Decrees Si aliquando sanare videntur languidos id Deipermissu sit ut homines probentur c. If they seeme sometime to heale the diseased it is done by Gods permission that men might bee thereby proved c. And againe hee saith Laqueâ sunt adversarii mederi non possunt They are the deviles snares they cannot heale 4. Object But the meanes which they use are wholesome and medicinable as herbs and oyntments and therefore herein they are not to bee found fault with Answ. 1. For the most part they use such meanes whereof no naturall or apparent reason can be given as to burne the thatch of the house to cut off some part of the beast bewitched and burne it and such like Concerning such things Augustine giveth a good rule Remedia ligaturae quâ medicorum disciplina condemnat non adhibenda c. Such remedies and ligatures which the skill of Physicke condemneth are not to be used 2. He saith further Ex traditione malorum angelorum sunt Such remedies had their beginning from the tradition of evill angels therefore hee concludeth that Phylacteria sunt animarum vincula Such Phylacteries things applied to or hung about the necke or other parts are but the snares of the soule 3. If they doe use herbs and oyntments and such other
outward meanes it is but to colour their devillish practice and inchantments whereby they worke and not by the vertue or operation of such herbs therefore it was well decreed in the Matiscane Councell as it is cited in the Decrees Nec in collectionibus herbarum quae medicinales sunt observationes aliquaâ licet attendere c. In the collection of herbs which are of themselves medicinall it is not lawfull to use any other superstitious observations Now on the contrarie it shall appeare that witches and other of that sort are worthie of punishment by death and that they are not by any meanes to bee tolerated in a Commonwealth 1. They are manifest transgressors against the first Table and every precept thereof for they doe combine themselves with Satan and forsake their faith and so make them other gods beside the Lord they also invent superstitious rites and ceremonies images figures and pictures which the devill hath taught them to worship him by and beside they prophane and abuse the holy name and titles of God in their superstitious invocations and inchantments And they appoint certaine holy daies solemnities and assemblies among themselves as the Lord hath appointed the Sabbath for his owne worship And thus they apparently violate every precept of the first Table 2. They are also enemies to the Commonwealth full of mischiefe practising their malice upon men and beasts and therefore the Civill law Propter magnitudinem scelerum maleficos appellat Because of the greatnesse of their mischievous practices calleth them Evill or Wicked doers They are manifest murtherers assaulting the life of Christian people where God permitteth by all devillish meanes and thus the second Table likewise is by them violated and perverted Gallas 3. They also are perverters of their children and seducers of others and so cause this mischiefe to spread further and to be transmitted over unto posteritie 4. Further if divine and humane lawes condemne all filthie societie and companie with beasts much more horrible and abominable is al confederacie and league made with devils and uncleane spirits Simler 5. Thomas touching this error that some should say Quod maleficium nihil erat in mundo c. That witchcraft was nothing in the world but in the opinion of men addeth Procedit haec opinio ex radice infidelitatis That this opinion proceedeth from the root of infidelitie because they doe not beleeve that there are any devils but only in the estimation of the people c. But we are taught by the Scriptures that the Angels fell from heaven and became devils by whom witches and Sorcerers worke 6. And this is sufficient to convince these men of error because the law of Moses judgeth the sinne of witchcraft worthy of death which they must ãâã ââcuse of ãâã if witchcraft were so small an offence and consisted but in opinion only And the Imperiall lawes herein doe concurre also with the Divine law which calleth Ars ãâ¦ã The Mathematicall it meaneth Magicall science damnable and it decreeth thus ãâ¦ã sunt Soothsayers and Diviners are to be burned Nec ârs ista disâi nec dâceât debet This art must neither be learned nor taught yea by the Civill law he which consulted with Soothsayers ãâ¦ã shall be punished by the sword QUEST XXXIII Of the ãâã stone of ãâ¦ã Vers. 19. WHosoever lieth with a beast ãâã Prâopins and the ãâ¦ã doe understand this of a beastly and bruââsh man with whom it is dangerous to converse and by death they understand here eternall death But this were to ãâã these grosse and unnaturall sinnes which here are condemned and these civill politicke lawes are literally to be understood 2. Therefore this law meeteth with that most unnaturall and monstrous sin of more than beastly lust ãâã this one kind also comprehending all other outragious lusts ãâã against nature as ãâã 18.22 and 20.15 ãâã 3. And there are two sinnes specially against nature either when non servitus ãâã speciââ the due kind is not kept as when the filthy company of beasts is desired Nature only having ordained the generation of mankinde to be with man the other is when non servatur debitâs sermo the due sex is not kept as when man with man worketh âilahinesse which was the sin of Sodome Thomas 4. And these are the reasons why such wicked persons should be put to death without all mercy 1. ãâã latur talibus flâgiriââ societ ãâã illa qua cum Deo noââs esse debet c. By such hainouâ sins that societie ãâã violated which ought to be betweene us and God seeing Nature it selfe whereof God is the Author is polluted with such perverse lusts c. 2. Such wicked and vile persons shew themselves worse than bruââ beasts qua coitu naturali contenta sunt which are content with naturall copulation Calvin and goe not out of their kind 3. Serit semen ubi aut nihil nâscitur ãâ¦ã contrarââm c. Such soweth seed where either nothing at all is ingendred or a monster contrarie to nature Pelarg. 5. Not only the man or woman committing this filthinesse but the beast also wherewith it is perpetrated was to be put to death Levit. 20.15 both for the detestation of the fact and lâst any other by thââ evill example should attempt to doe the like with that beast Lyran. QUEST XXXIV The reasons why mân are given over to unnaturall lust 1. THis bestiall sin may be committed two waies either indirectly when one not at the first intending any such filthy act but being inflamed with lust ad coitum simplicâter simply unto that carnall act because it cannot be satisfied as he would seeketh to have it satisfied howsoever or else directly at the first there is a wicked inclination unto this bestialitie 2. Tostatus giveth three reasons of it why some men are caried into these unnaturall lusts 1. Their vile corrupt nature which is procured by the evill disposition of the country as in Aethiopia and Lybia and toward the poles in the remote countries monstrous shapes and formes are found which are the fruits of such unnaturall lusts 2. Some grow bestiall by frensie and madnes and other distemperatures of the braine 3. Some by an evill use and custome as it seemeth the Sodomites even from their childhood were exercised in those acts of filthines As these reasons may be yeelded of the unnaturall appetite of men which feed of raw flesh yea of the flesh of men as bruit beasts so also of unnaturall lust Tostat. qu. 14.15.3 But a better reason may be given than all these for these unnaturall and beastly lusts are the traits of Idolatry and false worship as here immediately it followeth that they should not offer unto any other gods And Saint Paul sheweth that the Gentiles after they had corrupted the true worship of God were given over unto their owne hearts desire Rom. 1. as the Canaanites haâing not the true worship of God defiled themselves
with these abominations for the which the Lord cast them out Levit. 18.24 Simler QUEST XXXV What is meant by sacrificing to other gods ãâ¦ã hearing that the two tribes and an halfe beyond Jordan had erected them an Altar they assembled themselves together against them as jealous lest they purposed to bring in a new worship of God Tostat. 5. And not onely they which committed Idolatrie themselves but they which perswaded others were to be put to death Deut. 13.6 7. QUEST XXXVI Whether Idolatrie now is to be punished by death Vers. 20. SHall be slaine 1. The word is charam that simply signifieth not to cut off but to destroy as an anathema thing accursed and bequeathed to destruction Iun. Pelarg. 2. The Interlinearie Glosse expoundeth it of excommunication and of eternall death but both the practise of those times and the like punishment here ânflicted upon other capitall crimes sheweth that it must be understood of the losse of the temporall life though beside without their great repentance Idolaters deserve also everlasting death Rev. 22.8 3. Some object that now Idolatrie is not to be punished by death but that such rather that are seduced should be instructed in the true worship of God and in the times of the Gospell it is fit more clemencie and mercie should be shewed than under the rigour of the law Answ. 1. Though Idolaters are to be instructed to reforme their error for the salvation of their soules yet this letteth not but that for so great impietie and for the example of others they should worthily suffer the paines of death 2. And now under the Gospel seeing robberie against the common peace and âreason against the life and safetie of the Prince and State are judged worthy of death Qui majestatem Dei ãâã dissime violavit tam leve facinus admisisse putabitur shall he which violateth the Majestie of God most impiously be thought to commit so small an offence Gallas 4. But although as Osiander saith the Magistrate non gladio in idololatriam vindicare teneatur be not now bound to take revenge of Idolatrie by the sword for some difference there is betweene Pagane idolatrie and Popish superstitious Imagerie the one being an absolute deniall of all Christianitie the other a mixing therewith of superstitious vanitie yet by the equitie of this Judiciall law which serveth for the strengthening of a morall precept the like sin of idolatrie may justly receive the like punishment As Cyprian repeating that law Deut. 13.12 Si audieris in una ex civitatibus c. If thou hearest of any of the cities c. that are drawne away to serve other gods that such a city should be destroyed thus further inferreth cujus praecepti memor Mattathias which precept Mattathias remembring killed him that approached to the idolatrous Altar to sacrifice c. Then he further addeth Quod si ante adventum Christi circa Deum colendum et idola spernendâ haec pracepta servata sunt c. Now if these precepts concerning the worship of God and despising of Idols were kept before the comming of Christ quanto magis post adventum Christi servanda sunt How much more ought they to be kept after the comming of Christ seeing he hath not onely exhorted us in words but in deeds Augustine likewise shewing a difference betweene the schisme of the Donatists and Pagane idolatrie thus concludeth Quis vestrum non laudat leges c. Which of you doth not commend the lawes given by the Emperours against the sacrifices of the Pagans illius quippe impietatis capitale supplicium est c. for the punishment of that impietie is capitall 5. R. Salomon thinketh that if a Jew did sweep an Idol Temple velornaret vel alia similia faceret quae sunt praambula c. or adorne it onely and doe other things which are but preambles to Idolatrie he was not to be punished by death but some other wayes Ex Lyrano But if enticing in words to idolatrie were judged worthy of death Deut. 17.5 much more to entice and draw by fact and example as in adorning and beautifying the Temples of Idols QUEST XXXVII Why idolatrie is judged worthy of death NOw the reasons why idolatry was held by Moses law to be worthy of death were these 1. Quia is cultus diabolo exhibetur qui idolorum author est Because that idolatrous worship is giuen unto the devill who is the author of Idols Gallas 2. Aequum est vita privari eos c. It is just that they should be deprived of life which forsake God the author and fountaine of life Simler To leave the worship of God who is the author of life and to worship the devill the author of death and destruction mille mortibus c doth shew himselfe to be worthy of a thousand deaths Gallas 3. Though euery transgression of the law be in some sort a breach of Gods covenant yet idolatry more specially is said to be a transgression of the covenant of God Deut. 17.2 Because men apparently and professedly thereby forsake the profession solemnely made of their service and obedience vnto the Lord Simler 4. And this severe punishment the Lord appointeth for idolatrie quia inter Aegyptios idololatria assiâeverant because the Israelites had accustomed themselves unto idolatry among the Egyptians in so much that they Moses yet living set up a golden calfe to worship Simler 5. Because of the ready inclination and propension of mans nature unto idolatry it was fit that it should by some severe punishment be restrained Calvin 6. And two things there are which doe exaggerate the nature of a sinne and aggravate the punishment thereof Res in quibâs committitur is in quos committitur c. The things wherein they are commited and they against whom they are committed Borrh. Both which concurre here in the sinne of apostasie and idolatrie For what mattââ can be of greater moment than the service and worship of God and what sin more grievous than that which is committed against God QUEST XXXVIII Of kindnesse how to be shewed toward strangers and why Vers. 21. THou shalt not doe injury to a stranger 1. There are two reasone why men are apt to doe wrong unto strangers a both because they are not allied by affinity or consanguinity and therefore no naturall affection is commonly shewed toward them because they are destitute of friends and patrons and therefore lye more open to wrong Tostatus 2. The stranger must neither bee injured in word nor wronged in deed Simler Neither secretly by fraud nor openly by violence neither must they be hindred by any private man nor publikely prejudiced by lawes made against them Tostat. And it is not enough not to doe them wrong but we must help them and doe them what good we can Gallas 3. And this reason is added because they were strangers in Egypt they did feele by experience what it was to use strangers hardly that by
of Christ. 4. Lippoman doth thus morally applie it Nihil Deo offerendum nisi integrum perfectum Nothing must be offered unto God but that which is entire and perfect 5. But the end and use onely was historicall that the first borne should not bee presented unto God before the eighth day because they were yet unfit for any service Marbach Quia talia animalia erant quasi abortiva nondum plenae consistentiae propter teneritudinem Because such yong beasts were yet but as abortive fruit not well consisting or put together because of their tendernesse Thomas QUEST LX. Why they are forbidden to eat flesh torne of beasts Vers. 31. NEither shall yee eat any flesh that is torne c. 1. As well that which was rent and torne of any beast cleane or uncleane as if it were goared of an oxe was not to bee eaten because the bloud was in it as also that which was tasted before and eaten by any uncleane beast as the Latine readeth praegustata if it were tasted before because an uncleane beast had touched it and so made it uncleane Simler Tostatus 2. Not onely that part of the flesh which was so torne but all the whole carcase was to be refused Lyranus Such were fowles and beasts taken in hawking or hunting Tostatus 3. And not onely that which was torne and thereof died but if it after lived and were killed by themselves yet because it was torne of beasts it was uncleane unlesse the beast so torne lived to recover that hurt and and Anabaptists for although the Lord had chosen Israel out of all the nations of the world to bee an holy people to himselfe yet he did foresee that many would depart from his law and therefore appointeth divers kinds of punishment for the offenders Pelarg. 5. Places of controversie 1. Confut. Against the Anabaptisticall communitie Vers. 1. IF any man steale an oxe c. he shall restore five oxen c. This law doth evidently convince the Anabaptists of error who would bring in a communitie of goods for if it were Gods will that all things should be common among men then were it no sinne to steale nay there could be no theft at all committed seeing then no man could take any thing wherein he had not as good an interest as another Ostaâd Neither was this onely Moses law that they should not steale but the doctrine of the Gospell also forbiddeth all kinde of theft and stealing Ephes. 4.28 Let him that stole steale no more but ãâã labour c. 2. Confut. A theefe by his deserved death doth not satisfie for the punishment of his sinne Vers. 2. IF hee bee smitten that he die Lippoman speaking of the capitall punishment of theft that although it doe not satisfie for sinne before God yet expiat eo supplicio ãâã temporales quanmissa culpa reatââ pânae aeternae reâanent exâlvendae c. It doth expiate or redeeme those temporall paines which after the fault pardoned and the guilt of eternall death remaine in Gods justice to bee paid c. Contra. This his assertion is grounded upon an error for where God forgiveth sinne he perfitly forgiveth both the sinne and the punishment thereto belonging As he saith by his Prophet I will forgive their iniquitie and remember their sinnes no more Ierem. 31.34 But if there remaine any temporall punishment still after forgivenesse then are the sinnes yet remembred because they are punished Indeed after remission obtained some chastisements remaine But as Chrysostom well saith God doth it Non de peccato sumons supplicium sed ad facuranos corrigens not taking punishment for our sinne but correcting us for our amendment afterward c. The theefe then by his death doth not satisfie before God either for his sinne or the punishment thereof temporall or eternall but onely satisfieth the politike law and giveth satisfaction unto men by his evill example offended His sinne together with the punishment is not otherwise pardoned than by faith in Christ. 3. Confut. Against the Romanists that abridge the power and libertie of the parents in marriage of their children Vers. 17. IF her Father refuse to give her c. This law giveth absolute power unto the father to ratifie his daughters marriage by consenting unto it or by dissenting to breake it off which sheweth what injurie is offred unto this libertie and right of parents by the practice of the Romish Church quae conjugia sine ullo parentum consensu inita probet which ratifieth marriages contracted and begun without consent of parents Gallas And Oleaster a writer of their owne hereupon inferreth thus Est que hic non parvum argumentum ad probandum c. Here is no small argument to prove that libertie unto marriage doth not altogether by the law of nature agree unto the same nor yet to enter into religion c. But it is an ordinarie thing with the Romanists both to marrie children without consent of their parents and to thrust them into Monasteries See more hereof elsewhere 4. Confut. Against Idolatrie Vers. 20. HE that offreth unto any gods but unto the Lord onely c. This is an evident place to convince all Idolaters of great impietie for they in bowing and kneeling unto Idols censing before them and making their prayers looking toward them doe apparently offer unto others than unto God onely Tostatus one of their owne thus writeth upon this text Non solum si immolet eis sed etiam si faciat alia pertinentia ad cultum divinum ut si flectat genua coram eis c. Not onely he which sacrificeth unto Idols but doth other things belonging to the divine worship as if he bow the knee before them c. was to be slaine Cyprian hereof thus excellently writeth Quid ante inepta simulachra sigmeââtaterrânae captivum corpus incurvas rectum te Deus fecit c. Why doest thou bow thy captive bodie before foolish images and terrene fictions God hath made thee upright c. looke up to heaven Quid te in lapsum mortis cum Serpente quem colis sternis What doest thou prostrate thy selfe with the Serpent whom thou worshippest into this deadly fall c. More hereof see elsewhere 5. Confut. Against those which either hold tithes not to be due by the word of God or challenge them by the ceremoniall law Vers. 29 THine abundance and thy liââur c. This may be understood as well of the tithes as first fruits which arise of the fruits and increase of the earth whether they be drie or moist Concerning then the law of tithes there was in the paiment thereof a treble right Partim erat morale it was partly morall and naturall for that the people should allow necessarie maintenance unto those qui divine cultu ad salutem populi ministrabant which ministred for the salvation of the people in the divine worship even naturall reason teacheth As even among the Heathen
Judges and pervert their words then it is not safe to receive any gift in that kinde which is given for the furtherance of ones cause No it is not lawfull for a Judge to take a gift to give right judgement Nam de vendâtione justi judicii veniretur ad venditionem nequissimi Lest from selling of just judgement they should fall to sell unjust judgement Tostat. And as it is unlawfull to sell justice so it is also to buy as S. Paul might have beene delivered for a reward Act. 24.25 but he chose rather to answer at Rome And in the ancient Church they were noted which did give money for their liberty that they might not be compelled to be present at the Gentiles idolatrous sacrifices Simler 4. So then howsoever the Canon law and the practice of the Church of Rome doth tolerate small gifts yet it is the safest way not to accept of any at all And herein the ancient Romane lawes are to be preferred which as is extant in their 12. Tabulae capite puniendum Iudicem c. did decree that Judge to be punished with death which tooke money to give sentence in a cause Dioclesian also made a Law that a sentence pronounced by a corrupt Judge ipso jure infirmam esse by the Law should be void and to be suspended by appeale Lystat being asked why he received not gifts of the Messerians answered Quia in lege justitiae peccatur Hee should have offended against the Lawes of justice Innocentius also hath a good saying speaking of corrupt Judges Vos non attenditis merita causarum sed personarum non jura sed munera non quod ratio dictet sed quod voluntas affectet non quod licâat sed quod lubeat c. pauperum causam cum mora negligitis divitum causam cum instantia promovetis c. You doe not consider the merit of the cause but of the persons not right but gifts not what reason enditeth but what will affecteth not what is lawfull but what you list c. the cause of the poore you neglect by delaying the cause of the rich you are diligent in promoting therefore Tostatus here resolveth and concludeth well that howsoever the Canons doe tolerate the receiving of small gifts yet it is better Si volunt effugere conscientiae scrupulum ut nihil omnino accipiant If they will avoid the scruple of conscience that they take nothing at all 5. A gift then is of great force it prevaileth much as the Wise-man saith in the Proverbs chap. 17.8 A reward is as a stone pleasant in the eyes of them that have it it prospereth whither soever it turneth As a precious stone shineth every way so a gift is available to any purpose Gifts doe much hurt in private matters as Amphiarans wife being corrupted with a precious jewell betrayed him and Procris chastity was overcome with a gift but in publike affaires gifts doe much more hurt as well in civill as Philip King of Macedonia non tam armis quam auro expugnavit libertatem Graecia did not so much by force and armour as by gifts and treasure overthrow the liberty of Greece As also in Ecclesiasticall matters where simonie doth as much hurt as bribery in the Common-wealth for they which by corrupt meanes attaine to the great preferments of the Church must needs also corruptly administer the same Aâ the Prophet Ezechiel noteth the false Prophets which for handfuls of barley and peeces of bread did prophesie false things chap. 13.18 Simler Therefore seeing the Spirit of God hath set it downe that gifts and bribery doe corrupt and blinde Nimia eorum est impudentia c. They are very impudent and shamelesse that will make their boast notwithstanding that though they receive gifts they can give right judgement Gallas QUEST XVII Why strangers are not to be oppressed in judgement Vers. 9. THou shalt not oppresse a stranger 1. Some thinke that this is a repetition of the former Law chap. 22.21 Thou shalt not doe injury to a stranger that it may appeare quanta cura domino sint peregrini c. how carefull God is of strangers Lippom. And because the Israelites were given to be inhumane and hard toward strangers as the Jewes are to this day that contemne all people beside themselves the Lord saw it necessary often to inculcate this precept Simler But rather I thinke with Cajetane and Gallasius that this is a new Law Illud communiter hoc specialitèr datur judicibus testibus accusatoribus That was given in generall this in particular to Judges witnesses accusers 2. And to this end God so provided in his wisdome that the Israelites and their fathers should be strangers and sojourners in other countries as in Canaan and Egypt ut captivitatis peregrinationis miseriam discerent to learne by experience what the misery of captives and strangers was that they might the better know how to have pity on the like Nemo libentius hospitem sine tecto suo introducit hospitio c. No man more willingly receiveth him into his house that wanteth lodging than he that was sometime without lodging himselfe no man sooner feedeth the hungry and giveth the thirsty drinke than he that felt hunger and thirst himselfe c. August 3. And whereas it is added You know the heart of a stranger the meaning is how full of care and griefe they are that you need not afflict them more Simler that they are destitute of friends and had need to be so much the more pitied Tostat. and seeing strangers are no inhabitants but such as passe thorow the country they should not be stayed nor hindred ut iter suum posset exequi that they may finish their journey Lyran. You know also by your selves their hearts how ready they are to call unto God for helpe against their oppressors as you did in Egypt Simler QUEST XVIII Of the divers festivals of the Hebrewes Vers. 10. SIx yeeres thou shalt sow thy land c. The Hebrewes had divers kindes of festivall dayes which all tended to the honour of God Now impendimus honorem Deo c. wee doe give honour unto God either for an eternall benefit and so they had juge sacrificium every dayes sacrifice or for some temporall which is either generall as of our creation in remembrance whereof they kept the seventh day holy or of our preservation ideo erat festum Neomemae therefore they kept the feast of the new Moone every moneth or speciall as of some speciall benefit and deliverance in remembrance whereof they had their festivals of weekes as Pentecost of moneths as the seventh moneth of yeeres as the seventh yeere and the seventh seventh yeere which was the Jubile Thomas QUEST XIX Why the land was to rest the seventh yeere Vers. 11. BVt the seventh yeere thou shalt let it rest c. 1. The land is said to rest in two respects First in a metaphoricall sense as we are
consecration Vers. 35 THou shalt do thus unto Aaron and to his sonnes c. 1. Some are of opinion that all things here prescribed to bee observed and done were de necessitate consecrationis of the necessitie of the consecration and if any thing were omitted the consecration was voide R. Salomon Lyranus But this is not like that if any thing were neglected in the manner of eating in respect of the place persons or time that their consecration should thereby have been void as Levit 10.17 Aaron being in griefe for the sudden death of Nadab and Abihu forgot the sinne offering which they should have eaten and suffered it to be all burnt and this was the eighth day after their consecration Levit. 9.2 when as yet the anointing was fresh upon them and they did not yet come forth of the doores of the Tabernacle Levit. 10.7 And yet notwithstanding this negligence there was no nullitie of Aarons consecration Tostat. quâst 18. 2. Therefore Tostatus opinion is rather to be received that some things were of necessitie in the consecration as the washing anointing of the Priests the putting on of the priestly apparell the sprinkling of themselves and their garments some things were only de solennitate belonging to the solemnitie of the consecration as the seething and eating of it in the holy place and eating it the same day it was a sin to omit any of these but thereby their consecration was not made voide QUEST XLI Why the consecration of the Priests continued seven daies Vers. 35. SEven daies shalt thou consecrate them c. 1. This consecration of the Priests was to continue seven daies together that both the Priests hereby might bee confirmed in their vocation and be assured thereof that they were thereunto appointed of God and that the people also might thereby take better notice that they were set apart by the Lord for that holy function Osiander 2. And further hereby thus much was signified that as the Priests seven daies together were consecrated so we per totum vitae curriculum throughout the whole course of our life should be consecrated and addicted to Gods service Simler Marbach 3. Likewise we are hereby admonished Pontificem continuo proficere non posse repente summum fieri c. that the Priest must daily increase and go forward that he cannot be made perfect at once that many gifts and graces are required in him Lippoman 4. It also sheweth that as their consecration was not perfect before the seventh day so we cannot attaine to perfection in this life Osiander QUEST XLII Whether all the sacrifices of the first day were iterated seven daies together or the sacrifice for sin only Vers. 36. ANd shalt offer everie day a calfe 1. Lyranus thinketh that not onely a calfe for a sinne offering was sacrificed everie day but two rammes also so that seven calves were offered and fourteene rammes in these seven daies So also Simler Borrh. Lippom. Pellican But seeing there is no mention made but only of the sinne offering we have no warrant to imagine any other sacrifice to have been iterated but that as belonging to their consecration 2. Iosephus thinketh yet more that all things were iterated every day which were done upon the first day as the anointing of them and the sprinkling of the Priests themselves and their garments But this is not like that their consecration was iterated it was sufficient for them once to be consecrated and seeing the ramme of consecration was killed onely upon the first day with the bloud whereof they were sprinkled they were so sprinkled but upon the first day 3. Tostatus his opinion is that the calfe which was the sacrifice for sinne and the consecration ramme were offered everie day expresse mention is made of the one and the other is implied in these words seven daies shalt thou fill their hands that is put into their hands part of the peace offering to be shaken to fro before the Lord as is prescribed vers 24. Now the ramme of burnt offering needed not to be daily offered during these seven dayes because there were every day morning and evening a lambe offered for a burnt sacrifice Sic Tostat. But this opinion cannot stand 1. Seeing Moses is bid to take two rams chap. 24.2 it is like that either both of them were âânued every day or none 2. And the filling of their hands signifieth nothing else but the consecrating of their Ministery as is before shewed whereof the hand was the organe and instrument it is not literally to be pressed to signifie the putting of the things offered into their hands 4. Therefore according to the words of the text of all the sacrifices appointed for the first day onely the calfe which is the sinne offering is prescribed to be iterated and the reason is because it was to cleanse and purifie the Altar Levit. 8.15 But only in this sacrifice were the hornes of the Altar touched with bloud and so sanctified which was not done in any of the other sacrifices QUEST XLIII To what end the sinne offering was offered every day of the seven Vers. 36. THou shalt offer every day a calfe c. for reconciliation or to make atonement 1. This reconciliation was not only made for the sinne of the Priests as thinketh Tostatus for the hornes of the Altar were laid on with this bloud whereby it was purified Levit. 8.15 2. Neither yet was this sinne offering prescribed only ad expiandum Altare to cleanse the Altar as thinketh Osiander Calvin For he had said before seven dayes shalt thou consecrate them that is the Priests and then it followeth and shalt offer every day c. so that this daily offering for the space of seven dayes belonged unto the consecration of the Priests 3. Therefore the end of this sacrifice for sinne was both to make atonement for Aaron and his sonnes as also to purifie and cleanse the Altar Iunius QUEST XLIV How the Altar was cleansed and why Vers. 36. ANd thou shalt cleanse the Altar 1. After the consecration of the Priests is set forth their Ministery and service both at the Altar of burnt offering and in the golden altar in the next Chapter Here three things are declared concerning the Altar of burnt offering 1. How it should bee purified 2. What should bee offered thereon 3. The profit and benefit that should come thereby the Lord would there come unto them and speake with them vers 42. and dwell among them vers 45. Lyranus 2. Two things are required to the purifying of the Altar it must first be cleansed not that it was polluted of it selfe but to shew that in respect of man omnia corruptione naturae profana ob peccatum c. that all things by the corruption of our nature are profane because of sinne Gallas Marbach As also it was not only cleansed but sanctified and set apart for holy uses that it should not be lawfull to offer their sacrifices elsewhere
here is taken for the singular according to the Hebrew phrase Oleaster As so the Lord saith I have made thee Pharaohs god chap. 7.1 where the word is Elohim in the plurall and sometime a word of the plurall number is joyned with an adjective of the singular as Isai. 19.4 I will deliver the Egyptians into the hands adonim kasheh Dominorum duri of Lords hard where the adjective is put in the singular sometime the adjective that is joyned with it is put in the plurall also but the relative in the singular Iosh. 24.19 Elohim kadashim his he is holy gods that is an holy God so likewise sometime Elohim is put with a verbe singular as Gen. 1.1 Bara Elohim creavit Dii God created sometime with a verbe in the plurall as in this place asherjeeben which may goe before us So then Elohim gods in the plurall is here put for the singular Make us a god Tostat. qu. 4. QUEST VIII How the Israelites would have their god to be made to goe before them TO goe before us 1. It is evident by this wherefore they desired a visible god to be made not to that end that they might with greater libertie eat and drinke feast and play before the idoll which they could not doe before the Lord for the Lord did allow them to rejoyce before him in sober and seemely manner Nor yet because they bee like unto other nations to have some visible image to worship but they shew the end thereof that they might have some visible presence to goe before them Tostat. qu. 6. 2. And whereas Moses being absent they might have desired some other guide in his place to direct them they doe not so both because they know none could be given them like unto Moses and if such an one might be found he was subject to the like danger as they imagined Moses to be fallen into they desire rather some visible god to be given unto them Tostat. qu. 8. 3. Neither were they so senselesse to thinke that an idoll made of silver or gold which hath eyes and seeth not eares and heareth not could goe before them 4 And Tostatus conceit is too curious that because they had seene images in Egypt which had as they thought a certaine divine power in them speaking sometimes and making answer unto demands And among the rest the Egyptian God Apis which was like a pide bull did appeare once in a yeare unto them and used to goe before them unto Memphis and all the Egyptians followed after playing upon their harpâ and other instruments he thinketh that the Israelites desired the like god to bee given them that they might have an image made endued with some divine power to goe before them But they never had seene any image in Egypt made with mens hands to stirre and move and walke before them The Egyptian god Apis was either a very pide pull indeed or the devill in that likenesse therefore they having seene no such president in Egypt it is not like they imagined any such thing 5. Wherefore these Elohim gods which they desire to be made were none other but images as Laban so calleth his little images gods Gen. 31. Gallas This then is the meaning that some image may be made them quae admoneret eos praesentiae divina which should admonish them of the divine presence Osiander And they say in effect but thus much Instituâ nobis cultum c. Appoint us some kinde of worship that God may be reconciled unto us Vt pergat nos praecedere That he may go forward still before us as he hath begun Ferus So then their meaning is not that the idoll to be made should still goe before them but that God represented and reconciled thereby might goe on still with them QUEST IX Why the people came to Aaron rather than to Hur his fellow governour BUt it will bee here questioned why the people demand this rather of Aaron than of Hur who was joyned with him in the government chap. 24. 1. R. Salom. maketh this the reason because that the people had killed Hur because he resisted them and this he saith was the manner of his death al the people came and spet into his mouth and so choaked him But it is not like if Hur in so good a cause had given his life that it should have beene omitted Phinehes fact in slaying the adulterer and adulteresse is commended and honourable mention is made thereof but Hur had beene more worthie to have beene recorded for not killing but in suffering himselfe rather to bee killed in defence of Gods pure worship Tostat. qu. 3. 2. Neither yet is it to be supposed that Hur was dead for some mention then is like to have beene made of his death being a principall governour and of the peoples lamentation for him 3. Therefore although Hur may bee thought to have yeelded and consented to their motion as well as Aaron as not being a more holy man than hee yet because Aaron was the chiefe and more principall he onely is mentioned Tostat. qu. 3. QUEST X. Whether at this time the Israelites wanted the presence of the cloud FUrther whereas they desire gods to bee made to goe before them it will be here objected that they had the presence of the cloud which went before them and they therefore needed not to have had any other guide 1. Oleaster therefore thinketh that the cloud might at this time be taken out of their fight but this opinion is briefely confuted before quest 4. the cloud did not leave them till they came into the land of Canaan when the manna also ceased Iosh. 5. 2. Some make the blinde curiositie of the people the cause why they regarded not that ordinarie signe of Gods presence but requested some figure and representation of God answerable to their vanitie Calvin So also Chrysostom Adhuc iâspicis quod miraris oblitus es largitoris Thou seest daily that which thou wonderest at namely the manna which fell every morning and thou forgettest the giver 3. But this also may bee joyned to the former reason they had staied 40. dayes in a plat and the cloud stirred not they had continued as long in this place about mount Sinai even fortie dayes as they had beene in all the mansion places since their comming out of Egypt and so they might doubt that this cloud should be their direction no longer to goâ before them into the promised land and therefore they desire another guide QUEST XI Why they say they knew not what was become of Moses Vers. 1. FOr of this Moses c. we know not what is become of him c. 1. R. Salom. thinketh they supposed he had beene dead and that Satan had made such an apparision in the aire as if they had indeed seene a coffin as if Moses had beene dead and his bodie put into it But if they had conceived that Moses were dead they would not have spoken
therefore thinketh right that these gates were onely the places of entrance into the great streets which went thorow the camp for the host lay in such order as that they had wayes and streets betweene their tents as wee see now in cities and townes as Iosephus also describeth the situation and disposing of the camp 3. Now Moses stood in the gate or entrance not because the use was to give sentence and judgement in the gates Lyran. Borrh. Or because Moses would have the Levites to give the onset in the beginning of a street and so to go thorow as Tostat. ibid. But this was the reason Moses tabernacle or tent was without the camp and so upon that occasion Moses stood in the entrance of the camp going now to his owne tent Iun. QUEST LXVIII Whether all the Levites were free from consenting unto this idolatrie Vers. 26. ANd all the sonnes of Levi. R. Salom. to whom consenteth Tostatus thinketh Quod nullus de Levitis aliquid peccaverit That none of the Levites sinned in this great transgression because it is said All the sonnes of Levi gathered themselves unto him and if the Levites had sinned âs other tribes there had beene no more cause to advance them to the Priesthood than other tribes Contra. 1. If that generall particle all bee pressed then it would follow that the children and all came which could not be for they were not able to use swords the meaning then is not that all the Levites came but all which came were Levites Iun. Sa. Or all is taken for many as this speech is usually restrained in Scripture as all nations are said to have come and bought corne in Egypt Gen. 41. 2. The Levites were more of Gods favour and grace than of their desert separated and selected for the Priesthood yet it is evident that this tribe was freer from consenting to this idolatrie than other tribes and for this their courage and readinesse in Gods service they received a blessing 2. Some thinke that even these Levites which armed themselves against their brethren were not altogether immunes à reatu free from this sinne but while they did it for feare levius peccarunt their sin was the lesse and so the mercie of the Lord appeared so much the more not only in pardoning their sin sed gloriam suam eorum manu asserere dignatus est but he vouchsafed by their hand to maintaine his glory Calvin Simler But it is not like that God would use their ministerie in the punishing of others which were guiltie of the same punishment themselves and their owne conscience accusing them they would have had no such courage to revenge the Lords cause upon their brethren it had beene also verie offensive to the guiltie parties to be punished by them which had beene alike guiltie And Moses proclaiming who pertaineth to the Lord let him come to me did meane that they only should come who had beene faithfull unto God and had not consented to that sinne 3. Some Hebrewes doe help the matter thus that because they cannot avoid it but that some of the kindred of the Levites were guiltie of this transgression because they did not spare their owne sonnes vers 29. that because it was lawfull for any of the other tribes to take unto them the wives of Levites their husbands being dead those children which they had by them might be said to be the sons of Levi that is grand children on their mothers side But this shift is taken away because Deut. 33.9 it is said that the Levites knew not their owne father or mother or children therefore they must needs bee understood to be Levites not by marriage or in some removed degree of kindred unto them but the immediate fathers and sonnes of Levites 4. Therefore the best opinion is that all of the tribe of Levi were not free from this sin of idolatrie many of them kept themselves as it is like at home and consented not but that a great sort even of Levi offended it may thus appeare 1. Because both Aaron himselfe was a ring-leader who can by no meanes be excused from this sin Lyranus 2. It could not be avoided but that many of the Levites were drawne away by Aarons example Iun. 3. But yet it is more evident because they consecrated their hands upon their owne sonnes and brethren yea their fathers and mothers that divers of the tribe of Levi fell away with the rest Lyran. Iun. Tostatus here answereth that the name of brethren is taken largely Pro fratribus qui sunt de filiis Israel For their brethren which were of the children of Israel qu. 35. Contra. 1. If it be allowed that the name of brethren is sometime so taken what saith he to the other names of father mother sonne These must be taken for the names of kindred or else we shall never have any certaintie in Scripture when we should by these names understand naturall fathers mothers and children 2. The other words companion and neighbour shew that the first is a name of kindred the first word ach signifieth here a brother in affinitie the second râah a companion and friend the third karob Vicinia ratione conjunctum him that was a neighbour in dwelling and vicinitie or neernesse of place Simlerus 5. It is evident then that some of the Levites were accessarie to this great impietie because they were punished among the rest So that R. Salomon is herein greatly deceived who thinketh that the Levites though they were blame-worthy in not resisting the idolaters yet were not idolaters themselves neither consensu mentis nec facto exteriori in consent of minde nor in any outward fact c. for the Levites had beene unjustly punished if they had beene innocent Nay R. Moses Egyptius goeth further saying that although the Israelites often are found to have committed idolatrie yet Levita nunquam idolatraverunt the Levites never committed idolatrie But the contrarie is evident by Aarons fall for hee apparantly was an idolater in his externall act in building an altar unto the golden Calfe and offering sacrifice before it Paulus Burgensis in his reply proceedeth yet further that when our blessed Saviour was put to death the Levites as they are distinguished from the Priests were not principeâ in crimine illo pâssimo principall agents in that wicked crime whereas it is evident that the Priests were the chiefe enemies that Christ had the Levites indeed are not named but seeing the high Priest with the other Priests which were of the tribe of Levi were the contrivers of Christs death then cannot that whole tribe be exempted from this villanous act which is the intendment of Burgensis a great favourer of that nation QUEST LXIX Of the authoritie which the Levites had to doe execution upon the idolaters and the rules prescribed them Vers. 27. THus saith the Lord c. 1. Tostatus thinketh that it is not necessarie here to understand that Moses had any speciall commandement
from God but because he had received a Law from God that idolaters should bee put to death in executing that Law hee might justly say that God commanded it quest 35. But seeing Moses was faithfull in all Gods house we must not thinke that hee would pretend the name of God without Gods speciall warrant yet whether Moses received this commandement from God by revelation or by manifest vision is not expressed Pelarg. The latter is more like as God used to speake to Moses at other times face to face 2. And Moses maketh mention of Gods commandement both to deliver himselfe from all suspition that he did not give this charge of hatred toward the people and in rage Simler As likewise the Levites were encouraged hereby to enterprise this worke which otherwise they would have beene hardly drawne unto Tostatus 3. Certaine rules are given them to observe 1. They must goe to and fro non solum transire jussi sunt they are not only bid to passe thorow but to returne to goe everie way ut in omnes populi partes animadverterent that they should in everie place take punishment of the people Gallas 2. They must go from gate to gate that is thorow the streets and common wayes Non committitur istis ut ingrediantur tentoria It is not permitted them to enter into their tents and houses Cajetan 3. And everie man is commanded to slay his brother c. not that everie one had a brother or kinsman to slay sed ut occidat indifferenter but he must indifferently kill both one and other whom he met that was to be killed not respecting kindred affinitie or acquaintance Tostat. qu. 35. QUEST LXX Whether the Levites did not make some difference among the people as they went and killed Vers. 27. SLay everie man his brother c. 1. Some thinke there was an outward marke of difference made among the people by the which the Levites discerned who were to be killed and who to be spared And here are divers opinions 1. Ab. Ezra with some other Hebrewes thinke that by drinking of the water their faces or bellies did swell that were the chiefe actors in this sinne But then many more should have been killed than 3000. See this conceit overthrowne before quest 59. 2. Gallasius thinketh that by the drinking of the water Moses perceived quibus idolum displiceret who they were which were displeased with this idoll and repented of their sin and who were obstinate by their refusall But it is not like that any of the people trembling now and being afraid at Moses presence durst so publikely and openly shew their contempt 3. Simlerus inclineth to thinke that there were some seditious persons in the camp that went about to make a commotion among the people and that the Levites did slay these ãâ¦ã But it is evident vers 35. that they were not slaine ãâ¦ã but for the golden Calfe Gallas 2. Some thinke there was no other signe of difference but in the notice and ãâ¦ã of the Levites it is probable Minime Levitas latuisse quinam primi esseââ ãâ¦ã Levites were not ignorant who were the chiefe Captaines of this perverse counsell ãâ¦ã beene hard for the Levites who as it is like kept themselves at home and were not present with the people of themselves to know in so great a multitude and in so short a time who were the ring-leaders Cajetan resolveth that the Levites were so directed by God who commanded this to bee done Et qui cunctâ recte disponit and who rightly disposeth all things so that no innocent man was put to the sword But this needed not to be feared seeing all the people in generall consented in this sinne and few or none of them were innocent 3. Wherefore their opinion is most probable who thinke that seeing all the people were guiltie only of this sinne a few only excepted that the Levites could not doe amisse whomsoever they killed as they met without making any difference that whereas all had sinned it was not unjust if a few were singled out from the rest to pacifie the wrath of God and to terrifie the rest 1. Ambrose giveth this reason Quia melius est pancorum supplicio universos eximi quà m in omnes vindicari It was better by the punishment of a few for all to escape than all to be punished 2. Gregorie Nyssenus saith Omnes sine dispositione punitoâ that all were punished without any difference quia una omnes admalum conspirantes quasi unus effecti sunt because all of them conspiring together in evill were now but as one c. Like as when one is chastised for his fault Non hoc aut illud affligit membruÌ he that beateth him doth not make choice of one part rather than another knowing that wheresoever he is whipped ad totum corpus sensum doloris transiturum that the sense of the griefe will reach to the whole body so was it here 3. Lippoman addeth because all the people were culpable Vt totus populus aliquando punitus videatur That the whole people might seeme to be punished it was more to Gods glorie and the honour of the tribe of Levi Si praceptum ãâã generaliter factum intelligamus If we understand this precept of Moses generally without any difference to have beene executed 4. Oleaster further so thinketh Omnes occurrentes sine delectu c. That the Levites killed all they met without any choice quemâdmodum in aliis punitionibus accidiâ as it happened in other generall punishments when some were plagued for all 5. Calvin and Simlerus make mention how the like thing was in use among the Romans that if a whole band or company of Souldiers had run away or committed any grievous offence the Emperour would tithe them out and put everie tenth man as he was drawne out by lot to death And thus the Thebean Legion which consisted all of Christians was twice tithed out by that cruell Emperour Maximinus 4. Now the contrarie reasons why some thinke that there was some difference made are these 1. Deus caco turbulento impotu c. God would not have revenge taken in his cause upon a blinâe and disordered heat Simler 2. By this meanes it came to passe ut placidâ totus populus quiesceret that all the people was well pacified when they saw only certaine pestilent men to be taken out of the way Calvin 3. Otherwise if there had beene no such difference made there would have no respect beene had of those which shewed themselves penitent for their sinne Gallas Contra. 1. Here need no disorder or confusion to bee feared seeing all the people were guilty the sword could not light upon any unjustly and in that three thousand onely of six hundred thousand were slaine it sheweth that the Levites executed Moses sentence with great discretion and moderation 2. The people might as well be pacified when they saw a few for examples sake to be punished among
9.20 4. Therefore these may be the causes why Moses prayeth againe 1. The Lord granted before that he would not destroy all the people at once sed ãâã ex inâervallo vel per partes but whether he would doe it in continuance of time and as it wore by peecemeale hee knew not which he prayeth for here Lippom. 2. And there might be other sinnes as well as this for the which the Lord should be angry with them as Deut. 9.18 he saith he prayed and fasted because of all their sins Tostat. 3. And now he prayeth not only for the turning away or judgements but that the Lord would be againe fully reconciled unto his people and restore them to their former state and condition of favour Simler 4. And he prayeth not only for the pardoning of their temporall punishment but against everlasting death which sinne deserveth Osiander QUEST LXXVIII What booke it was out of the which Moses wisheth to be raced Vers. 32. IF thou wilt not race me out of the booke which thou hast written 1. By this booke R. Salomon understandeth the booke of the Law as Deut. 33.4 Moses commanded us a Law hee desireth if the Lord were purposed to destroy the people that his name should not be mentioned in the Law nor he taken to be the Law-giver for to what purpose should he be spoken of as a Law-giver unto that people which was not Contra. But this is not the meaning 1. Because the bookes of the Law were not yet written Moses therefore would not desire to be raced out of a booke which was not 2. Neither would Moses aske that of God which was in his owne power to doe now Moses did write the booke of the Law and he might have left out his owne name if he would 3. Againe Moses setteth against this great benefit the safety of the people the greatest losse which he could have but this had beene no such great losse unto Moses not to have his name remembred in any such written booke 4. Moses here useth a disjunctive speech Doâ this or else race mee c. but if he meant the racing of his name out of the booke of the Law there had beene no disjunction at all for one had followed upon the other for if Israel had beene destroyed neither should Moses have written the booke of the Law which was only given unto Israel for it had beene in vaine to give Lawes unto a people that were not 5. Moses also speaketh of a booke which God had written now Moses writ the booke of the Law the ten Commandements only were written with Gods hand Tostat. quaest 41. 2. R. Abraham Francus who writeth upon Aben Ezra understandeth the racing out of this booke of the death of the body and he addeth further that there is quaedam rota coelestââ a certaine celestiall wheele wherein are many starres which worke by their influence upon those iââeriour bodies and by the moving of this wheele death or life is caused so that thus he would interpret Moses speech Cause me by the motion of this wheele to dye But seeing the motion of this wheele which he imagineth is the naturall cause as he supposeth of life and death Moses could not dye naturally before his time came and if now he should have died it had beene not a naturall death but supernaturally caused by God therefore not by the motion of any such wheele Tostat. ibid. 3. Hierom also differeth not much from this former opinion in substance understanding Moses desire of death in this life he wisheth Perire in praesentiam non in perpetnum To perish for the present not for ever But whereas the Lord afterward answereth Moses Whosoever hath sinned will I put out of my booke vers 33. it followeth that they which sinne not that is without repentance are not put out of that booke but all as well the righteous as unrighteous the just and the sinners are subject to this temporall death therefore Moses speaketh not of that 4. Hierom hath beside another opinion for upon that place Psalm 69.28 Let them bee put out of the booke of life neither let them bee written with the righteous he inferreth that God hath two bookes viventium justorum of the living and of the righteous that was the booke of the living In quo ante adventum Dei Prophetae Patriarchae scripti sunt Wherein the Prophets and Patriarkes were written before the comming of God in the flesh the other wherein the faithfull are written whereof our blessed Saviour speaketh Rejoyce because your names are written in the booke of life and of the first Moses saith he speaketh in this place So some doe understand this booke in the same sense with Hierom of the booke of Gods Covenant which hee made with Israel out of the which the Gentiles were excluded of which mention is made Ezech. 13.9 where the Lord saith that the false Prophets shall not be written in the writing of the house of Israel So Moses desireth here not to be counted of the family of Israel wherein all the Prophets and Patriarkes were written But if Israel had now perished the booke of Gods Covenant with Israel likewise should have beene no more remembred therefore it had beene superfluous for Moses to desire to be raced out of that booke And againe the booke of the living mentioned in the Psalme is the same with the booke of life spoken of Apocal. 3.5 I will not put his name out of the booke of life In which booke of life not only the Prophets and Patriarkes before Christ but all the faithfull before and since are written 5. Cajetane understandeth it De libro principatuâ in hoc mundo Of the booke of principality and preeminence in the world for it is decreed with God as in a booke Quod isto vel illi principentur in hac vita That such or such shall beare rule in this life And so Moses desireth to lose his principality and government which the Lord promised him that hee would make of him a great nation c. But whereas they which sinned only are taken out of this booke of life and yet many wicked and evill men are governours in the world it cannot be meant of any such booke or decree of principalitie or government 6. Oleaster by this booke thinketh to be understood the booke of the acts and doings of the righteous which is mentioned Iosh. 10.13 and 2 Sam. 1.18 But there are many righteous men whose names and acts were not written in that booke which is now thought also to be lost therefore it had beene no great matter for Moses to wish to be put out of that booke 7. Burgensis maketh foure bookes of God 1. One is the booke of life wherein only are written the names of the Elect that are ordained unto life as when souldiers are written in the muster booke which are pressed and appointed for warre 2. That also may be called the booke
5. Burgensis thus understandeth it that the Lord holdeth not the innocent in the remission of their sinne to be innocent in respect of some punishmet which may remaine But daily experience sheweth the contrary that God multa peccata impunita praeâerit doth leave many sinnes unpunished at all neither doth the punishment remaine the sinne being once pardoned Calvin 6. Oleaster giveth this sense Vere innocentem ita percutiet c. Sometime hee will smite or correct the innocent as though he were not innocent as he sheweth by the example of Iob lest God might seeme to be unjust in afflicting the righteous But if God should be said in the same action and at the same time to absolve and not to absolve it would include a contradiction 7. Wherefore the best interpretation is that which the Septuagint follow ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the guilty he will not purifie so that here two Hebraismes must be observed first the word is iterated and repeated In absolving I will not absolve to shew the certainty of the thing that is nullo modo absolvam I will by no meanes absolve Iun. Secondly I will not absolve that is punio I doe or will punish Vatabl. And further here must be supplied the word sontem the guiltie I will not absolve Iun. Calvin Gallas Pelarg. As the like place is found Ierem. 46.28 venakeh lo enakeh in setting thee free I will not set thee free that is will not hold thee altogether innocent but will punish thee So also Ierem. 25.19 In being innocent should yee be innocent where the same word is doubled the meaning is they should not be altogether innocent Calvin 8. Calvin also propoundeth another sense because nikkah sometime signifieth to cut off it may be thus interpreted succidendo non succidam in cutting off I will not cut off and so it may be a reason of the former sentence that God will forgive sinnes and not cut off the sinners altogether But he preferreth rather the former interpretation for the other sentence ending with a perfect distinction sheweth that the sentence following hath no dependance of it QUEST XII What the Lord visiteth for in the posteritie of the wicked Vers. 7. VIsiting the iniquity c. 1. Lest God having hitherto proclaimed his mercie might be thought not to regard the sinnes of men the Lord now addeth that he is also a visiter and punisher of sinne upon the wicked and their posterity Ferus 2. And by sinne here is understood neither the act of sinne which cannot be transmitted over unto other but being a transitory thing resteth in the doer nor the fault which only goeth with the act nor the blot which is only in the soule of the sinner and offender nor yet the guilt for if the children were guilty of their fathers sinnes then they should for the same be everlastingly punished therefore by sinne is meant the punishment of sinne which is extended to their posterity Tostat. qu. 8. 3. And God usually punisheth the fathers but unto the fourth generation as the Amorites and Amalekites were punished after 400. yeeres which expired in the fourth generation Gen. 15. vers 13 16. Oleaster QUEST XIII How the children are punished for their fathers sinnes Vers. 7. THe iniquity of the fathers upon the children c. In deciding of this question how the sonnes are punished for their fathers sinnes it must be considered whether the punishment bee inflicted by man or by God 1. If by man the punishment bee imposed it is either in the losse onely of temporall things or in death the children may justly be deprived of temporall things as of possessions privileges honours for the transgression of their parents As by humane Lawes treason against the Prince or Common-wealth is punished with death in the offenders and losse of honours and goods in their posterity But the punishment of death cannot be inflicted upon the children for their fathers offences as a rule is given in Deut. 24.16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children nor the children for the fathers 2. If the punishment be inflicted by the Lord it is either eternall or temporall first eternall punishment is laid upon none but upon the party that sinneth The same soule that sinneth shall dye Eâech 18.4 If it be temporall it consisteth either in the losse of some temporall benefit or of life if the first not onely little ones and infants as the Hebrewes thinke shall suffer for their fathers sinnes but even they which are of yeeres as the Israelites did beare the iniquity of their fathers forty yeeres in the desart and the Jewes great and small were afflicted in the Babylonian captivity but where the punishment of temporall death is decreed by the Lord there onely the infants are punished for their fathers sinnes as the children of the rebellious Cora Dathan and Abiram were swallowed up with their fathers the greater sort also perished in that destruction but then they were such as consented thereunto Tostat. quâst 9. So also Achan was stoned with his sonnes and daughters for the sacrilege by him commited where Tostatus thinketh that they were little ones because the greater sort were not privy to his sinne seeing he had hid the stollen things in the ground But it is more like that they were such as might give consent unto the sinne and conceale it and that the things were not hid without their privity Iun. Or for the greater detestation of that fact and the example of others this exemplary punishment might be inflicted upon them Osiander But here two exceptions may be taken unto Tostatus conclusions 1. That he maketh infants liable to those sinnes of the fathers which the Lord saith he will here visit to the third and fourth generation whereas onely those children which continue like haters of God as their fathers were and imitate their impiety are included in this commination as appeareth by that clause inserted in the second Commandement of them that hate me Againe when infants are cut off by death their owne originall sinne is sufficient cause thereof which bringeth death upon them and so infants are taken away not onely to the fourth generation but in other succeeding ages further off 2. He restraineth this generall speech visiting the iniquity of the fathers onely unto temporall punishments beside death whereas the Lords judgements are not to be limited to this or that kinde but sometime by corporall death sometime by other temporall punishments hee doth visit the iniquity of the wicked fathers in their evill posteritie QUEST XIV Why the posteritie of the wicked are punished for their fathers sinnes VNto the third and fourth generation There are foure answers usually made to shew the equity of this that the posterity of the wicked should be punished for their fathers sinnes 1. Because God that gave life may againe without any injustice require it againe Nulli facit injuriam occidendo quemcunque He doth no wrong by slaying of
externall act 6. qu. The law of Moses did not onely restraine the hand but the minde 7. qu. Whether any morall and naturall duties were to be restrained by positive law 8. qu. Of the perfection and sufficiencie of the Morall law 9. qu. Of the abrogation of the law Questions upon the rest of this twentieth Chapter 1. QUest In what sense the people are said to have seene the voices which are properly heard and not seene 2. qu. What is meant here by voices whether the thunder or other voices 3. qu. VVhether there were a sound of the trumpet beside the voices 4. qu. Of the feare of the people and their going backe 5. qu. VVhy they desire that Moses would speake unto them 6. qu. VVhy the people are afraid they shall die 7. qu. How the Lord is said to come unto them and why 8. qu. How the Lord is said to tempt and prove his people 9. qu. VVhy the people stood afarre off and where 10. qu. How Moses is said to draw neere to the darknesse 11. qu. VVhy the Lord saith he spake unto them from heaven 12. qu. Why this precept is repeated of not making any graven image 13. qu. Of the meaning of these words Yee shall not make with me 14. qu. VVhy mention is made onely of images of silver and gold 15. qu. VVhy the Lord commanded an Altar of earth to be made 16. qu. VVhy the Altar was not to be made of hewen stone 17. qu. VVhy the lifting up of the toole is said to pollute the Altar 18. qu. How Jeremie is made to agree with Moses who saith the Lord commanded not any thing concerning sacrifices 19. qu. Of the difference betweene burnt offerings and peace offerings 20. qu. Whether it was lawfull to sacrifice in no other place than before the Arke or Tabernacle 21. qu. Whether it was lawfull to sacrifice before the Arke at the Tabernacle while they were asunder 22. qu. How long the Arke was severed from the Tabernacle 23. qu. Of the removing of the Tabernacle 24. qu. Of the places where it was lawfull or unlawfull to sacrifice 25. qu. How God is said to come and goe and how he is said to be in the world 26. qu. Whether it were not lawfull to goe up by steps to the Altar 27. qu. Why they were forbidden to use steps up to the Altar 28. qu. Of the abominable Idoll of the Gentiles called Priapus and the filthie usages thereto belonging 29. qu. Why the secret parts are counted uncomely Questions upon the one and twentieth Chapter 1. QUest Of the necessitie of the Iudiciall lawes 2. qu. The difference of the Morall Iudiciall and Ceremoniall lawes 3. qu. How the Ceremonials are abolished 4. qu. How far the Iudicials are now to be retained 5. qu. Why these lawes are called Iudgements 6. qu. How Moses propounded these lawes by speaking or by writing 7. qu. Why the Israelites were called Hebrewes 8. qu. How the Hebrewes became servants 9. qu. The difference betweene Hebrew servants and strangers 10. qu. Of three kinds of libertie and how servitude is agreeable to the law of nature 11. qu. How these six yeares are to be accounted 12. qu. The reasons why they ought to set their servants free 13. qu. Why the space of six yeares is limited for their service 14. qu. How the servant is said to come in with his bodie 15. qu. What manner of wise the master was to give to his servant 16. qu. Whether such separation betweene the servant and his wife were lawfull 17. qu. Why the servant was brought before the Iudges and what doore he was set to 18. qu. Of the divers kinds of punishments used among the Israelites 19. qu. What is meant here by Ever 20. qu. When the servant was to goe out free in the seventh yeare when in the fiftieth yeare 21. qu. Certaine cases put when the yeare of Iubile came before the yeare of remission 22. qu. Whether it were lawfull among the Israelites for the parents to sell their children 23. qu. In what sense it is said She shall not goe out as other servants 24. qu. Whether it must be read betrothed or betrothed not 25. qu. How shee was to be redeemed 26. qu. Why it was not lawfull to sell their maids to strangers 27. qu. What the meaning is of these words He hath despised her 28. qu. What kinde of betrothing is here understood 29. qu. Whether it were lawfull to take another wife to the former 30. q. Of the true reading and meaning of the 10. vers 31. qu. What these three things are mentioned in the text 32. qu. Whether maid servants were set free in the seventh yeare and not sometime before sometime after 33. qu. The summarie sense of this law concerning maid servants 34. qu. Of the end scope and intent of this law 35. qu. What kinde of smiting is here meant 36. qu. Why the murtherer was to die the death 37. qu. In what sense the Lord is said to offer a man into ones hand 38. qu. What places of refuge were appointed 39. qu. Why the Lord appointed places for such to flie unto 40. qu. What is to be counted wilfull murder 41. qu. Of the difference betweene voluntarie and involuntarie murder and the divers kinds of each 42. qu. Why the wilfull murderer was to be taken from the Altar 43. qu. What manner of smiting of parents is forbidden 44. qu. Of the grievous sin of paricide 45. qu. The law of manstealing expounded 46. qu. The reason why manstealing was punished by death 47. qu. What kinde of cursing of parents is here understood 48. qu. What manner of strife the law meaneth 49. qu. What punishment the smiter had if he which were smitten died 50. qu. VVhat should become of the smiter if the other died after he walked upon his staffe 51. qu. Of the equity of this law in bearing of the charges 52. qu. VVho should beare the charges if a servant had done the hurt 53. qu. VVhat servants this law meaneth and what kinde of chastisement is forbidden 54. q. The meaning of this clause For he is his money 55. qu. VVhether this law meane the voluntarie or involuntarie hurt done to a woman with child 56. qu. VVhether the death of the infant be punished as well as of the mother 57. qu. VVhether this law extendeth it selfe to infants which miscarie being not yet perfectly formed 58. qu. VVhy the action is given unto the husband 59. qu. VVhether the law of retalion be literally to be understood 60. qu. VVhether the law of retalion were just and equall 61. qu. Of servants freedome for the losse of an eye or tooth 62. qu. VVhat manner of smiting and goaring of a beast is here understood 63. qu. VVhy the ox that goareth was commanded to be stoned to death 64. qu. VVhy the flesh of the ox was not to be eaten 65. qu. In what case the owner is to die when his ox goareth any to death 66.
ââmplicitie In the first sense simple theft may be punished by death not in the ââcond Neither in that place pag. 5. is any exception take to the lawes of the Realme as too rigorous against simple theft but it is mainââined that the lawes of the land intend not the punishment of death for such imple theft as is more at large shewed pag. 412. quest 3. chap. 22. but alloweth âhe favour of the booke Onely a request is made to Reverend Iudges that âo great exactnesse bee not required in reading of such simple Clearks Bâ it will be objected that such as steale for necessity being once acquitted anâ burnt in the hand if they be deprehended in the like againe do die for it aâd therefore the law of the land punisheth simple theft with death The answeâ is thaâ now it is not simple theft being joyned with obstinacie and custome ãâã sinne Againe it will be objected that women âtealing for necessitie being not admitted to the privilege of their booke though they steale onely for necessitie doe suffer death for such theft It may be ânswered that in women such kinde of theft argueth great boldnesse and impuâencie to whom their naturall shamefastnesse and impotencie ought to be a brâlle more ââan unto men and therefore in them it is a greater fault and yet if âhe like favour were extended to them as to men in the like cases no great inconvenience neeâ to be feared Thus much in this place I thought good to advertise the Reader oâ lest there might be any mistaking This laborious and painfull worke was finisheâ by the Lords gracâous assistance the fifth of Iune Anno Domini 1608. aetatis Authoris 46. Pââysed be God our âeavenly Father with the holy Spirit through Christ Iesus our most blessed Lord and Saviour forever Amen FINIS Deut. 4. v. 18. Synopsis papismi ad Regiam Majestatem and the Antilogie or counterplea Ecclesia triumphans ad sereniss Reginam Antithesis doctrinae Evangelicae Pontificiae ad Henricum Principem Epist 3. nescio quomodo quotiescun que legitur quasi nunc fiar ita afficit mentes audientium serm 77. Cor. 4.16 Noah signifieth rest Abram an high father Isaack laughter Iacob âa supplanter Ioseph added Hosh. 10.3.8 Ezech. 28 1â 2 Sam. 19.25 1 Sam. 19.31 ãâã 43. Cum haberet supra omnes potestatem quasi parens expostulare malebat quam quasi judex punire vincere volebat non plectere aequitatis judex non poenae arbiter maluit sibi homines religione quam timore astringere de obit Theodos. Prefat ad ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã p. 21. 2 Sam. 20.25 Phil. 1.18 Act. 15.39 Theodoret. lib. 5.6.7 Ambr. in obit Valentinian ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã p. 99. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã p 34. Ierem. 38.9 Theodor. l. 4. cap 32. Pro âe praesente senatus hominumqââ praeterea viginti âilia vestem mutâverunt orat post redit 1 Sam. 2 3â 2 King 2â â ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 43 Ego tibi mercedem dabo si me tanto labore liberaveris Socrat. lib 6. cap. 20. quâmad modum parentes a filiis vel pueris vel aegrotis multa patiuntur donec pueritia vel aegritudo transeat de serm in monte 34. Psal. 45 4. Socrat. lib. 7.23 Matth. 25 2â 2. Peter â 13.ââ quis mihi jure succenseat si quantum caeteris ad res suas obeundas quantum ad festos dies Iudorum celebrandos quantum ad alias voluptates conceditur temporis quantum alij tribuunt in tempestivis conviviis quantum denique aleae quantum pilae tantum egomet mihi ad haec studia recolenda sumpsero Tull. orat pro Archi. poeta 1. Cor. 4. ââ 2 Cor. 10. ââ Eph. 6.19 Psal. 12â Hieronym Sophronio Hieron ad Rustiâ Epist. 7. Augustin ibid Tit. 1.8 Epist. 57. In Cantic â3 ser. Philip. 3.15 Philip. 1.18 Mar. 9.40 Rom. 14.17 18. Epist. 15. Tom. 9. de utiliâate jeâunii Cyril ad Geââadium Cyprian lib. 3. Epist. 2. Hom. 43. ad cap. Matth. 23. 1 Cor. 4. Epist. 11â Lib. 83. quest Quest. 71. Hââron Pammach S.c. S.c. S.c. T.r. T.r. S.c. G.r. S. ad S.H. Whether were firsâ created thâ heaven or the earth How God called the light day Whether the firmament be the starry heaven Mountaines before the flood The earth not dryed by the winde The opposite part of the earth not drowned The water and earth make buâ one Globe The earth deeper than the water The measure of the compasse of the earth Pererius Whither the waters were conveâed that covered the earth Terra humilia potuit defââderââ How the sea is kept in that it overfloweth not the earth Whether the red sea be higher than Egypt The earth higher than the sea Whether the whole sea be a continued water Why the approbatioÌ God saw it was good is omitted the second day Hebrewes curious observations Dionââ Halicaâ Rom. Antiq. li. â What Moneth the first in the yeare Lib. 1. Hexem c. 4. First moneth in the yeare Exod. 12.2 Epist de celebr Paschal Hebrewes ãâã Why the Moone is called a great light The distaÌce of the Sunne and Moone from the earth Ambrose reasons of the greatnes of the Sunne and Moone The lawfull vse of the celestiall bodies The vanity of judiciall Astrology Astrologicall predictions false and vncertaine Oracles of Apollo deceitfull How men may prognosticate of the weather The blasphemous assertions of some Astrologers How it commeth to passe that astrological predictions sometimes come to passe Hebrewes âables Ex Peretio Monstrous births of women begotten of beasts God appeared in no humane shape when he made man Divers opinions of the image of God in man Augustines divers conceits hereof The image of God consisteth not in the natural substance of the faculties oâ the soule but in the gifts of grace Adam lost the image of God by his fall Origen unjustly condemned by Epiphanius How man exerciseth his dominion over creatures If man had not sinned no beasts should have been killed for food Beasts should not have beene killed for knowledge or pleasure before mans fall Their reasons answered that thinke no flesh to have beene eaten before the floud What food the cattell lived of in the Arke Divers reasons proving the use of beasts for food before the floud See more of this matter C. 9. q. â To whom God said let us make man The lying computation of yeeres of the Egyptians The Papists confuted that âestâaine marriage 1. The great wisdome of God in the creation 2. The great bounty of God 3. Gods image must be repaired 4. Mans obedience toward his Creator 5. God illuminateth the soule 6. To delight in good things S.H. S. c. S. c. differ vet S. H. ad S. H. s. b. div accep Ch.c. h.c. appâspr s.c. h.s.c. s. c. S.h.c. S.h.c. s. ad h. c. differ veâ diff veâ h. C.c. app pro. prop. S. plur ãâã singul s.c. S.h. sense Of the Fâunes and Satyres Pereriâs deceived Hebrewes curious obseruations The
cognitione carent quae cognitio non alia re quà m fide in Christum constet Which want the knowledge of Christ which knowledge consisteth in nothing else than in faith in Christ. Marbach Commentar in hunc locum Against this opinion that faith in Christ is not commanded in the Morall law the reasons follow afterward but first the question must further be explaned 1. First then we are to distinguish of faith which is of foure kindes or sorts 1. There is fides initialis or fundamentalis the faith of beginnings or the fundamentall faith whereof the Apostle speaketh Hebr. 11.6 That he which commeth unto God must beleeve that God is c. And this kinde of faith toward God the Apostle referreth to the doctrine of beginnings Heb. 6. 1. This faith apprehendeth onely the being and essence of God to know him to be the only Lord. 2. There is another faith called fides miraculorum the faith of miracles touched by the Apostle 1. Cor 13.2 If I had all faith so that I could remove mountaines 3. There is fides historica an historicall faith which beleeveth all things to bee true that are written in the Scriptures in which sense S Iames saith The Devils beleeve and tremble they beleeve there is a God and that all is true which the Scripture speaketh of God of his justice power punishing of sinners rewarding of the righteous 4. There is beside these a justifying faith whereof S. Paul maketh mention In that I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Sonne of God who hath loved me and given himselfe for me Galath 2.20 This faith is the life of the soule whereby hee which beleeveth is able in particular to apply unto himselfe the merits of Christs death Now this is the difference betweene these foure kindes of faith the first apprehendeth the essence and being of God the second the faith of miracles his power the third which is the historicall faith his truth the fourth namely the justifying faith his mercie The three first to beleeve God to be to beleeve him to bee omnipotent to beleeve him to be just and true are included in the first precept Thou shalt have no other Gods c. but not the last wherein is the errour of the Romanists that make all these kindes of faith the same in substance differing only in property which if it were true then it were possible for them that have the one faith to have the other and so Devils also which in some sort doe beleeve should also be capable of justifying faith But this matter that all these kindes of faith are not the same in substance nor of like nature with the justifying faith is shewed elsewhere whither I referre the Reader 2. Further we are to distinguish of the law for it is taken sometime more largely either for all the Scriptures of the old Testament as Luk 16.17 It is more easie that heaven and earth should passe away than that one title of the law should fall So Ioh. 15.25 It is written in their law they have hated mee without a cause which testimony is found in the Psalmes Psal. 35.19 or else the law is taken for all the bookes of Moses and so the Law and Prophets are named together Matth. 7.12 This is the Law and the Prophets But the law is sometime taken more strictly for the Morall law whereof the Apostle speaketh Rom. 7. I knew not sinne but by the law and so S. Paul opposeth the law of workes to the law of faith Rom. 3.27 Now as the law is taken generally either for all the old Scriptures written by the Prophets or for the writings of Moses it cannot be denied but that faith in Jesus Christ is in this sense both contained and commanded in the law for of Christ the Lord spake by the mouth of his Prophets Luk. 1.70 And Moses wrote of Christ as our Saviour saith Had yee beleeved Moses yee would have beleeved me for Moses wrote of mee Ioh. 5.45 But as the law is taken strictly for the Morall law the law of workes which containeth only the ten words or Commandements so we deny this justifying faith to bee commanded in the law 3. Indirectly or by way of consequent it will not bee denied but that this faith also is implied in the law because we are bound by the law to beleeve the Scriptures and the whole word of God for this is a part of Gods worship to beleeve his word to be true and so some define faith Est certa persuafio qua assentimur omni verbo Dei nobis tradita It is a certaine perswasion whereby wee give assent to all the word of God Vrsin And so by this precept wee are bound to receive all the promises and doctrines concerning Christ delivered in the old and new Testament But directly as a part and branch and so a worke of the law wee deny justifying faith to be in this precept or any other prescribed or commanded The reasons are these 1. The Morall law and the Gospell differ in the very nature and substance for the one is naturally imprinted in the heart of man the other is revealed and wrought by grace The first the Apostle testifieth where he saith The Gentiles which have not the law do by nature the things contained in the law Rom. 2.14 The other also is witnessed by the same Apostle Rom. 2.24 We are justified freely by his grace The argument then may be framed thus The morall law is graft in the heart of man by nature but faith in Christ is not by nature but by grace above nature for if it were naturall all men should have faith which the Apostle denieth 2. Thessal 3.2 Faith then in Christ belongeth not to the law Therefore it is strange that Bellarmine confessing in another place that pracepta decalogi sunt explicationes juris natura that the precepts of the decalogue are the explications of the law of nature Lib. 2. de Imaginib Sanctor cap. 7. could not inferre hereupon that the precepts of faith and of the Gospell are no explications of the law of nature and therefore have no dependance of the morall law Ambrose useth this very argument Nemo sub lâge fidem constituat lex enim intra mensuram ultra mensuram gratia Let no man place faith in the law for the law is within the measure and compasse of nature but grace is beyond measure Ambros. in 12. Luc. 2. The effects of the law of works and the law of faith are divers for the one worketh feare the other love and peace as the Apostle saith Ye have not received the spirit of bondage to feare againe but yee have received the spirit of adoption whereby we crie Abba Father Rom. 8.17 Againe the Apostle saith The letter killeth the Spirit giveth life 2 Cor. 2.6 Thus then the argument standeth the same thing cannot bee the instrument of contrary things of life and death peace
of his owne people that were espoused unto him he is not said to be jealous of them 2. Hee suffered them to walke after their owne lusts not because hee could not have hindred them but the wise Creator permitteth the reasonable creature to follow the instinct of their nature yet calling some by grace whom he pleaseth and punishing the rest for abusing the light of nature who therefore were left inexcusable because knowing God by the creatures they yet did not glorifie him as God as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 1.21 QUEST V. Of the titles which the Lord here giveth himselfe and wherefore I Am the Lord thy God strong jealous c. The Lord giveth unto himselfe here foure severall titles the more to inforce this commination following 1. He calleth himselfe their God because he had taken them into his speciall protection and had bestowed many benefits upon them therefore they ought to love him more than any other Tostat. 2. He is a strong God potest se veluno nutu vindicare which can revenge himselfe at his becke Lippom. And he is strong as well to effect his promises to the obedient as to punish the disobedient Vrsin 3 Zelotes est nolens habere consortium in amando He is jealous he can abide no partner in that which he loveth Tostat. And this as well signifieth his indignation qua commovetur suis contumeliis whereby he is moved for the contumelies that are offered unto him Vatabl. as the love of God toward them for jealousie ariseth ex amore ejus qui laditur propter turpitudinem c. from the love of him that is hurt because of some uncleannesse committed c. Vrsin 4. Lastly in saying visiting the iniquitie he sheweth his severitie in tantum non connivet ad impietatem c. he is so farre from winking at impietie that hee punisheth it even in the posterity of the wicked and their sonnes and nephewes Lippom. QUEST 6. Of the generall commination and promise annexed VIsiting the iniquitie c. 1. Some take this to be a speciall perswasion added to this commandement Quia inter omnia praecepta nullum majus est quam hoc Because there is none among all the precepts greater than this The generall motive was set before because he brought them out of the land of Egypt Tostat. 2. But I approve rather their opinion which take this commination and promise to appertaine unto all the commandements but to be joyned to this because it is fundamentum caeterorum the foundation of the rest Vrsin Huic mandato tanquam principali ex quo alia oriuntur addidit Dominus minas c. To this commandement as the principall out of the which the other take their beginning the Lord added threatnings and promises c. Lippom. And this is confirmed by the words here following vers 6. to them that love me and keepe my commandements the Lord maketh mention of keeping his commandements not of one but of all 3. It might have pleased God simply to have propounded his commandements but he both adjoyneth promises to stirre up our dulnesse and threatnings to terrifie the perverse and froward which promises are rendred not as the deserved reward of our obedience for it is of mercie as the Lord saith shewing mercie unto thousands otherwise we doe no more than our dutie and therefore deserve nothing Simler QUEST VII How it standeth with Gods justice to punish the children for the fathers sinnes THe iniquitie of the fathers upon the children c. 1. Theodoret upon this place hath this singular opinion by himselfe Quod nudae literae insistere impium sit c. That it is evill to insist here upon the bare letter seeing the law saith The fathers shall not be put to death for the children nor the children for the fathers but every man shall be put to death for his owne sinne Deut. 24.16 And he addeth further Majores apud Deum sunt comminationes quà m poenae c. That God useth greater threatnings than punishments as every one that was not circumcised at the eight day is threatned to be cut off and yet many in the desert were uncircumcised at that age whom Ioshua circumcised in Gilgal and so here he thinketh that this is threatned onely to terrifie parents from sinning So Theodoret. Contra. 1. But this were to give great libertie to offenders to thinke that God onely threatneth for terror it might be inferred as well that God doth but dallie also with his promises as with his threatnings which were impious to thinke 2. If God doe not alwayes punish as hee threatneth it doth not argue any revocation of his judgements but his mercifull forbearing to call men unto repentance 3. That commination against the neglect of circumcision is not denounced against the infant whose fault it was not if he were not circumcised the eight day but against them that did not see it performed on their infant as appeareth by the example of Moses Exod. 4. punished for the neglect of circumcision And so accordingly all they which deferred the circumcision of their children in the wildernesse their carkaseâ fell there 2. Origene maketh this allegoricall exposition The father that sinneth he maketh the Devill Pater peccati diabolus est The devill is the father of sinne all they are his children which doe his works Diabolus ergo dum hic mundus stat non recipit sua peccata c. The devill while this world standeth doth not receive punishment for his sinnes redduntur infilios i. in eos quos genuit per peccatum but upon his children whom he hath begotten by sinne are their sinnes rendred for men while they are in the flesh are corrected of God c. Contra. But that this is a forced and farre fetcht exposition the other opposite part manifesteth of the Lords shewing mercie unto thousands but the devils expect no mercie And againe seeing this commination is specially made to terrifie wicked parents it can no wayes concerne the Devill to whom the law was not given but unto men 3. Hugo de S. Victor giveth this reason why children are punished for the sinnes of their fathers because they are Sicut aliquod membrum ipsorum quia in ipsis malefactoribus quo dammodo erant seminaliter peccabant They are as a part of them because they were in seed in the malefactors themselves and so in a manner sinned in them Contra. But the Prophet saith the same soule that sinneth shall die the children being but yet in the loynes of their fathers as the tree in the seed had no soules therefore then could they not sinne 4. Some doe reconcile this law and that other Deut. 24. where it is said that the fathers shall not be put to death for the children nor the children for the fathers after this manner that there a rule is given for the proceedings in civill judgement that one shall not suffer for another but this is understood of Gods judgement
before whom all are held as guiltie and who prescribeth no law to himselfe Acacius Contra. But this solution is not sufficient for Ezechiel which saith the same soule that sinneth shall die speaketh also of the judgements of God which should not be inflicted upon the children for the fathers Ex Simler 5. Cajetane giveth this solution Although God in the law command that the sonnes should not bee put to death for the sinnes of the fathers Ipse tamen qui creator conservator Dominus est unicuique nemini facit injuriam c. Yet he that is the Creator preserver and Lord of every mans life doth no man wrong if he temporally chastise the sonnes c. His reason dependeth upon Gods right and power which hee hath over every mans life that as he gave it so he doth no wrong to take it away at his pleasure Contra. But the Lord saith by the Prophet Ezech. 18.32 I desire not the death of him that dieth Now if there were no other cause why the Lord should punish the children of the wicked in taking away their life but the will and pleasure of God the Lord should seeme to desire the death of men contrary to that saying of the Prophet 6. Procopius giveth this exposition that God threatneth to punish the posteritie of the wicked ut parentes à peccandi licentia retraheret to withdraw the fathers from sinning parentes non tam dolent sua morte quà m liberorum prasertim si his fuerint authores mortis Fathers doe not so much grieve for their owne death as for the death of their sonnes especially if they were the cause of it Contra. This is true that the punishment of the children redoundeth to the parents but this is not all that by this meanes the fathers should bee drawne to repentance for although their children be neere them yet they are neerer to themselves and their owne punishment would much more move them 7. There remaine two most usuall expositions the first is that temporally sonnes may be chastned for their fathers but not eternally for aeternaliter quilibet punitur pro malo quod egit c. For eternally every one shall be punished for the evill which he doth himselfe Tostat. quaest 5. So also Thomas Si loquimur de poena qua habet rationem medecina c. If we speake of that punishment which is by way of medicine we may be punished for another Such are all temporall and bodily corrections they are medicinall and tend to the good of the soule and the sonne quantum ad animam non est res patris in respect of his soule is not any thing of his father but in respect of his body Sic Thom. 1.2 quaest 87. artic 8. Contra. Although this exposition be sound and true yet it doth not fully take away the doubt moved before 1. For the Prophet Ezechiel also speaketh of temporall punishment namely of captivitie which the sonne should not beare for the father 2. And this place is rather understood of eternall punishment than temporall which the sinne of Idolatrie deserveth Simler 3. And the phrase here used visiting the iniquitie of the fathers upon the children sheweth that the Lord speaketh rather of penall judgements which should bee inflicted upon the sonnes of the wicked than of medicinall corrections 4. And Augustine further urgeth this reason that if it bee understood of temporall chastisement as of captivitie then non solum odio haebentibus sed diligentibus se redderet peccata c. God should not onely render the sinnes to those that hate him but to those that love him for Daniel and the three children and Ezechiel with other righteous men went into captivitie Sic Augustin quaest 14. quaest veter novum Testament 8. There remaineth the second common and received sense of these words which most of the fathers thus understand that the Lord will visite the iniquitie of the fathers upon the children if they also continue in the wicked race and follow the evill example of their fathers as Hierome Ideo iniquitates eorum portaverunt quia imitatores eorum in nequitia extiterunt Therefore rhey doe beare the iniquitie of their fathers because they did imitate them in their wickednesse Hieron in oration Ierem. Some agreeing in generall with the rest that it is to be expounded of the wicked children of wicked parents yet doe understand it of originall sinne which is properly called the sinne of the fathers because they received it from them which is punished in unregenerate children of the wicked but is pardoned in those that are regenerate To this purpose Gregor lib. 15. Moral cap. 22. Contra. But originall sinne is extended further than to the third and fourth generation which are here mentioned therefore it is not like the Lord meaneth that sinne Ex Simler Some will not have this place at all understood of the sinnes of the fathers but of the children onely qui peccant sicut patres which sinne as their fathers did But as Tostatus well argueth against this assertion This were not to punish the sinnes of the fathers in the children Sed peccatorum filiorum malorum in seipsos but of the wicked sonnes in themselves Tostat. quaest 5. Therefore the former exposition is currant to expound these words of the sinnes of the children which they learned of their fathers Quia patrum extiterunt aemulatores haereditario malo de radice in ramos crescente They are punished because they ded emulate their fathers this hereditarie evill growing from the root into the branches Hieron in Ezech. cap. 18. So also Augustine Ex eo quod addidit qui me oderunt c. In that he addeth which hate me it is understood that they are punished for the sinnes of their fathers Qui in cadem perversitate parentum perseverare voluerunt Which would persevere in the same perversitie of their fathers August cont Adimant cap. 7. Gregor Quisquis parentis iniquitatem non imitatur nequaquam ejus delicto gravatur Hee that imitateth not the iniquitie of his father is not burdened with his sinne lib. 15. moral cap. 22. Chrysostome Si nepos secutus fuerit vias patris avi sui c. If the nephew doe follow the wayes of his father and grandfather thou wilt render unto them to the third and fourth generation Chrysost. homil in Psal. 84. Super illa non in aeternum irasceris c. Severus Therefore it is added Of those that hate me Vt apertum fiat non ob parentum peccata sed ob illorum odium adversus Deum eos puniri That it may bee manifest that they are not punished for their fathers sinne but for their owne hatred against God Ex Lippoman Diodorus In eisdem peccatis persistentes just as poenas exolvetis Persisting in the same sinnes you shall pay just punishment Rabanus Peccata patrum iniquorum non redundant ad filios si eorum imitatores in malo non fiant The sinnes of the wicked
qu. VVhether the owner might redeeme his life with money 67. qu. VVhat servants this law meaneth Hebrewes or strangers 68. qu. VVhy a certaine summe of money is set for all servants 69. qu. VVhat kinde of welles this law meaneth where and by whom digged 70. qu. How the live and dead ox are to be divided where they were not of equall value Questions upon the two and twentieth Chapter 1. QUest Of the divers kinds of theft 2. qu. VVhy five oxen are restored for one and for a stollen sheepe but foure 3. qu. Of the divers punishment of theft and whether it may be capitall 4. qu. VVhy the theefe breaking up might be killed 5. qu. How it is made lawfull for a private man to kill a theefe 6. qu. After what manner the theefe was to be sold. 7. qu. VVhy the theefe is onely punished double with whom the thing stollen is found 8. qu. How man is to make recompence of the best of his ground 9. qu. Of the breaking out of fire and the damages thereby 10. qu. VVhy the keeper of things in trust is not to make good that which is lost 11. qu. How the fraud in the keeper of trust was to be found out and punished 12. qu. VVhat is to be done with things that are found 13. qu. How this law of committing things to trust differeâh from the former 14. qu. How the cause of theft differeth from other casualties in matters of trust 15. qu. VVhether it were reasonable that the matter should be put upon the parties oath 16. qu. VVhat was to bee done if the thing kept in trust were devoured of some wilde beast 17. qu. Of the law of borrowing and lending when the thing lent is to be made good when not 18. q. Why such a strait law is made for the borrower 19. qu. Why the hirer is not to make good the thing hired as when it is borrowed 20. qu. Whether the fornicator by this law is sufficiently punished 21. qu. Why the woman committing fornication bee not as well punished by the law 22. qu. What kinde of dowrie this law speaketh of 23. qu. How this law differeth from that Deut. 22.29 24. qu. What was to be done if the fornicator were not sufficient to pay the dowrie 25. qu. What if the fornicator refused to take the maid to wife 26. qu. Whether this law were generall without any exception 27. qu. How farre this positive law against fornication doth binde Christians now 28. qu. Why the law doth require the consent of the father to such mariages 29. qu. Why next to the law of fornication followeth the law against witchcraft 30. qu. What kinde of witchcraft is here understood 31. qu. Whether love may be procured by sorcerie 32. qu. Whether witches can indeed effect any thing and whether they are worthie to bee punished by death 33. qu. Of the odious sinne of bestiall and unnaturall lust 34. qu. The reasons why men are given over to unnaturall lust 35. qu. What is meant by sacrificing to other gods 36. qu. Whether idolatrie now is to bee punished by death 37. qu. Why idolatrie is judged worthie of death 38. qu. Of kindnesse how to be shewed toward strangers and why 39. qu. Why widowes and Orphanes are not to be oppressed 40. qu. How and by what meanes prayers are made effectuall 41. qu. Why usurie is called biting 42. qu. What usurie is 43. qu. Of divers kinds of usuries 44. qu. That usurie is simplie unlawfull 45. qu. Certaine contracts found to be usurie not commonly so taken 46. qu. Whether all increase by the lone of money be unlawfull 48. qu. Whether it were lawfull for the Iewes to take usurie of the Gentiles 49. qu. What garment must bee restored before the Sun set which was taken to pledge and why 50. qu. Who are understood here by gods and why 51. qu. VVhy the Magistrate is not to be reviled and with what limitation this law is to be understood 52. qu. VVhether S. Paul transgressed this law Act. 23. when hee called the high Priest painted wall and whether indeed he did it of ignorance 53. qu. VVhat is understood here by abundance of liquor 54. qu. Of the difference of first fruits and tithes 55. qu. Of the divers kinds of tithe 56. qu. Reasons why tithes ought to be payed 57. qu. VVhether this law bee understood of the redemption of the first borne or of their consecration to Gods service 58. qu. VVhy the first borne of cattell were not to bee offered before the eighth day 59. qu. Of the meaning of this law whether it were mysticall morall or historicall 60. qu. VVhy they are forbidden to eat flesh torne of beasts 61. qu. Of the use and signification of this law Questions upon the three and twentieth Chapter 1. QUest Of raysing or reporting false tales 2. qu. What it is to put to the hand to be a false witnesse 3. qu. How great a sin it is to be a false witnesse 4. qu. VVhether in this law we are to understand the mightie or the many 5. qu. How the poore is not to be esteemed in judgement 6. qu. How person are accepted in judgement and how far the poore may be respected 7. qu. VVhy mercie is to bee shewed toward the enemies oxe and asse 8. qu. VVhether it is to bee read Thou shalt helpe him or lay it aside with him 9. qu. How the poore mans cause is perverted in judgement 10. qu. Against lying in judgement and how it may be committed 11. qu. VVho are meant here by the just and innocent 12. qu. In what sense God is said not to justifie the wicked 13. qu. VVhether a Iudge ought alwayes to follow the evidence when he himselfe knoweth the contrarie 14. qu. A Iudge is not bound of his knowledge to condemne a man not found guiltie in publike judgement 15. qu. VVhat a dangerous thing it is for a Iudge to take gifts 16. qu. VVhether all kinde of gifts are unlawfull 17. qu. VVhy strangers are not to bee oppressed in judgement 18. qu. Of the divers festivals of the Hebrewes 19. qu. VVhy the land was to rest the seventh yeare 20. qu. What the poore lived upon in the seventh yeare 21. qu. VVhether the seventh yeare were generally neglected in Israel 490. yeares together as Tostatus thinketh 22. qu. Why the law of the Sabbath is so oft repeated 23. qu. VVhat manner of mention of strange gods is here forbidden 24. qu. VVhy it is forbidden to sweare by the name of strange gods 25. qu. Whether a Christian may compell a Iew to sweare by his Thorah which containeth five books of Moses 26. qu. VVhether a Iew may be urged to sweare by the name of Christ. 27. qu. VVhether a Saracon may be urged to sweare upon the Gospell or in the name of Christ. 28. qu. VVhether a Christian may sweare upon the the Iewes Thorah 29. qu. That it is not lawfull for a Christian to sweare upon the Turkes Alcaron or