Canaanites haâ—ing 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 〈…〉 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 â—nflicted 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 â—reason against the life and safetie of the Prince and State are judged worthy of death Qui majestatem Dei 〈◊〉 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 assiâ—everant 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 quibâ—s 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 mattâ—â— 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
be deferred like as the eating of the Passeover might bee put off to the second moneth upon extraordinary occasion as if a man were uncleane or in his journey Num. 9.10 This also appeareth in that for the space of forty yeares all the while that the Israelites sojourned in the wildernesse their children were not circumcised till Iosua his time Iosua 5.5 and the reason is given vers 7. They did not circumcise them by the way they were continually in their journey to remove from place to place and therefore could not conveniently be circumcised But if Moses example be objected whom God would have killed because his sonne was not circumcised the answer is ready that the case is not alike for Moses might either have circumcised his childe before he came forth or he had not such great haste of his way but might have stayed to performe so necessary a worke 6. But whereas the Lord prescribeth the eighth day both some Hebrewes are deceived that thinke the sonnes of bond-servants might be circumcised before and the Ismaelites that circumcised at the age of thirteene yeares QVEST. IX Circumcision found among those which belonged not to the covenant Vers. 13. HE that is borne in thy house and bought with thy money c. All which belonged to the covenant or would have any part among the people of God were circumcised but on the other part it followeth not that all which were circumcised did belong to the covenant as the Ismaelites Egyptians Ammonites Moabites and other people inhabiting neare to Palestina were circumcised as Hierome sheweth upon the 9. chap. of Ieremie vers 26. These people retained circumcision as a rite and tradition of their fathers but not as a signe of the covenant or profession of their faith and obedience QVEST. X. Circumcision not imposed upon strangers FUrther it is here questioned whether the Hebrewes were to compell their servants that were strangers to take upon them the profession of their faith and to be circumcised 1. Tostatus thinketh that their servants might be compelled but not other strangers that dwelt among them but that it is not like for seeing he that was circumcised was a debter of the whole Law Galat. 5. and circumcision was a badge of their profession it was not fit to force any man to take upon him a profession of religion against his desire 2. Cajetane thinketh that servants might be forced to take the outward marke of circumcision though not the spirituall profession thereunto annexed in 12. chap. Exod. But these two cannot be severed as whosoever is now baptized must needs also enter into the profession of Christianity 3. Pererius thinketh aright that the necessity of circumcision was not imposed upon any beside the posterity of Abraham neither that the Hebrewes might force their servants to take circumcision yet he saith that it was lawfull for them to use the ministery of servants uncircumcised as now Christians have Moores and Turks to serve them Perer. disput 5. But herein Pererius is deceived and I preferre the opinion of Thomas Anglicus which he misliketh that it was dangerous for the Hebrewes to be served with men of a divers religion lest they also by them might have beene corrupted 5. Wherefore the resolution is this that as no stranger servant or other was to be forced to circumcision but it must come from his owne desire as it may be gathered Exod. 12.48 so neither were they to receive any uncircumsed person into their house that would not be circumcised this is evident by Abrahams practice that circumcised all his servants both borne and bought with money who no doubt would not have served him if they had not submitted themselves to Gods ordinance againe seeing every one in the house must eat the Passeover Exod. 12.4.19 neither stranger nor borne in the house must eat any leavened bread for the space of seven dayes and yet none could eat the Passeover that was not circumcised vers 48. it followeth that no uncircumcised persons were to bee entertained unlesse they were contented to be circumcised QVEST. XI The penalty for the neglect of circumcision afflicted onely upon the adulti Vers. 14. THe uncircumcised male shall be cut off c. Saint Augustine following the reading of the Septuagint in this place who adde the man childe which is uncircumcised the eighth day which addition is not in the originall doth understand this place of infants and their cutting off he interpreteth of everlasting death to be cut off from the society of the Saints and by the breaking of the covenant would have signified the transgression of Gods commandement in paradise for the not being circumcised saith he Nulla culpa in parvulis Is no fault in little ones and therefore not worthy of so great a punishment and so he urgeth this place against the Pelagians to prove that infants are guilty of originall sinne and therefore have need of remission Lib. 16. de Civit. Dei cap. 27. 1. In that Augustine expoundeth this cutting off of separation from the society of the Saints he interpreteth right some take it for the corporall death some for the extraordinary shortning of their dayes some for excommunication but it is better taken for the cutting off from the society of Gods people now and the fellowship of the Saints afterward for he that should contemne circumcision being Gods ordinance doth consequently refuse the covenant and grace of God whereof it is a seale and pledge 2. But that exposition of Augustine seemeth to be wrested to referre the breaking of the covenant to Adams transgression 1. The Apostle saith that they sinne not after the like manner of the transgression of Adam Rom. 5.14 2. The Scripture calleth not that prohibition given to Adam a covenant 3. The Lord calleth circumcision his covenant vers 20. what other covenant then is broken but that which the Scripture treateth of here 3. Neither can this place be understood of infants that are uncircumcised 1. That addition the eighth day is used onely by the Septuagint it is not in the Hebrew 2. the words are qui non ciâ—cumciderit hee which shall not circumcise c. so readeth the originall the Chalde paraphrast Iunius c. which sheweth that it must be understood of them that are adulti of yeares of discretion not of infants 3. Abrahams practice sheweth as much who circumcised those that were of yeares 4. Againe to breake the covenant is not incident to children the punishment therefore is not to be inflicted where the offence cannot be committed 5. If Infants be not circumcised it is the parents faults for omitting it not the Infants as may appeare in the example of Moses whom the Lord punished and not the childe for the neglecting of that Sacrament QUEST XII Whether Abraham laughed through incredulitie Vers. 17. ABraham fell upon his face and laughed 1. This was not onely an inward rejoycing of the minde as the Chalde translateth for Abraham indeed
to deale with the gain-saying Jewes would not so much stand upon his Apostolike illumination neither would they rest upon it 3. Neither is the word seed taken here not singularly for the person of Christ but collectively for the whole spirituall seed of Abraham the people of God consisting of the Jewes and Gentiles Beza for this sense seemeth to bee coact and not proper and the Apostle himselfe denieth it to bee understood of many but of one 4. Neither doth Saint Paul ground his argument upon the received opinion and confession of the Jewes which hee was experienced in being brought up under the feet of Gamaliel who all generally did hold this promise of blessing in Abrahams seed to be understood of the Messiah Perer. for thus the Apostles reasoning should be inverted and that made his conclusion which is his argument for the Apostle doth not reason thus This place is referred to the Messiah Ergo he saith not seeds but seed But thus rather standeth his argument In saying seed not seeds hee meaneth but one Ergo the Messiah that is Christ. 5. Wherefore if the Apostles words bee thorowly weighed and examined he enforceth two conclusions in this one sentence the first is that this place out of Moses must needs be interpreted not of all Abrahams seed confusedly but of some one specially the other is that this being evicted that the Lord in this promise speaketh but of one it will follow of necessity that this one must be Christ. For the first that Abrahams seed is not understood promiscuè for all his seed the Jewes themselves could not deny for this seed was first restrained to Isaack and Ismael excluded then in Isaack it was assigned to Iacob and Esau refused in Iacob this seed was singled out in Iuda when the other tribes were carried into captivity and never returned therefore seed here cannot bee taken for many but wee must still proceed in descending till we come to one in whom this blessing is performed Calvin For the second that this one must be Christ it will necessarily follow because none else can be named in whom all the Gentiles received this blessing for that place Psal. 72.17 All nations shall blesse him and be blessed in him cannot be understood of Salomon who was so farre from procuring a blessing to all nations that he brought a curse upon his owne nation and posterity when for his idolatry a rent was made in the Kingdome the smallest part falling to the share of his sonne Rehoboam And beside this Psalme is a propheticall song of Christ under the type of Salomon as vers 5. They shall â—eare him as long as the Sunne and Moone endureth vers 11. All Kings shall worship him vers 17. His name shall endure for ever These sayings cannot be uttered of Salomon or any other mortall man but onely are true of the Lord Messiah There being then none else found by whom the Gentiles were spiritually blessed in being called from their filthy idolatry to the knowledge and worship of the true God in being lightned with Scriptures brought to the acknowledgement and so remission of their sinnes but onely Christ none else in whom they beleeve whose name is blessed among them Who can this else bee but Jesus Christ the Messiah And thus it is evident that the Apostle hath reasoned strongly from this place that salvation commeth not by the Law but by faith in Christ which is the thing the Apostle in this place intendeth to prove QUEST XXIII Whether Abrahams obedience or Isaacks patience were more notable IT may seeme that Isaacks obedience in yeelding himselfe willingly to death was more excellent and worthy of note than Abrahams because it is a greater patience to suffer death for Gods cause than to inferre it Isaack also should have felt the sorrowes and pangs of death in his body which Abraham was onely to behold Notwithstanding these reasons Abrahams example of obedience excelled 1. Because he was to sacrifice his onely most beloved and innocent sonne which was no doubt more grievous unto him than if he had died himselfe 2. Isaacks death came unlooked for it should have beene finished at once Abrahams griefe as it pierced his heart three continuall dayes before so the remembrance of this fact would have continued still 3. The Scripture giveth sentence with Abraham which maketh mention in this place and others beside of Abrahams offering up of Isaack but ascribeth no part thereof to Isaack Now because that example of the King of Moab which offered up the King of Edoms sonne in sacrifice and not his owne as the common opinion is may be thought to resemble Abrahams fact here it shall not be amisse briefly to examine that place as it is set downe 2 King 3.27 QUEST XXIV Whether the King of Moab sacrificed his sonne and wherefore FIrst then 1. Neither is it like that the King of Moab having learned of his Priests that God prospered Israel because of Abrahams faith which doubted not to offer his sonne as Lyranus therefore he attempted to doe the like for at this time the Israelites did not so greatly prosper the kingdome being divided because of the idolatry of Salomon and diversly afflicted and the King of Moab offered not his owne son but the King of Edoms as it is expounded by Amos 2.1 For three transgressions I will not turne to Moab c. because it burnt the bones of the King of Edom as lime 2. Neither did the King of Moab this by the advice of the Priests after the example of Israel because they used to offer up their sons to Molech thinking to please the God of Israel hereby Burgens For the Israelites rather learned this idolatrous use of the Gentiles and the Israelites prospered not but were punished of God for such impieties 3. Nor yet did the King of Moab this to move the Israelites to commiseration when they should see to what misery and necessity he was brought to offer such a bloudy sacrifice as Tostat. and Vatab. for he did it rather to despight them as shall even now appeare 4. Nor yet did he offer this sacrifice only with an intent thereby to appease his gods and to procure their help which opinion indeed the heathen had of such wicked and devillish offerings Cajetan Perer. 5. But it is most likely that the King of Moab assaying to breake thorow to the King of Edom and could not tooke the Kings sonne of Edom that was to reigne after him and therefore is called the King of Edom Amos 2.1 and sacrificed him in the sight of his father to his great griefe Iunius QUEST XXV What was the cause of the indignation against Israel SEcondly where it followeth thus For that Israel was sore grieved and they departed from him or there was great indignation against Israel 1. This is not referred to the indignation or wrath of God as though the Lord should be offended with Israel sent a plague amongst them
high 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 Hâ—rah 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
light but made not darkenesse but onely made a separation betweene the light and the darknesse Gen. 14. Whereupon Augustine groundeth this distinction Aliud fecit Deus ordinavit aliud non fecit sed ordinavit God mâ—dâ— sâ—me things and ordered them also some things he made not but ordered as he giveth instance of the darknesse so the workes of darknesse God cannot be said to have made but only he disposeth and ordereth them QUEST XXVII God otherwise hardneth then as a generall mover of the heart THirdly some referre that worke of God which he sheweth in the hardning of the heart to that generall power which he giveth unto the creature in whom all things move live and have their being Act. 17.28 So that the hardning of the heart as it is an action or worke is of God but as it is evill it proceedeth from man So Zuinglius Quatenus est Dei Creatoris opus est crimen non est quantum autem hominis crimen est scelus est As it is of God the Creator it is a worke it is no faule but as it is of man it is a fault it is a sinne The Master of the sentences hath the like saying Actus mali in quantum actus 〈◊〉 boni sunt à Deo authore Evill acts as they are acts are good and proceed of God the Author lib. 2. distinct 35. But this solution doth not take away the doubt for as God is the Creator and so generall worker hee only giveth power to move the heart this moving being the generall action is divided into two parts for there are good motions of the heart and evill the mollifying of the heart and the hardning in the good motions God concurreth two wayes as a generall mover by his creating power and as a particular directer by his regenerating grace but in the other motions he only hath a stroke as a generall mover in the particular action of hardning as it is evill hee concurreth not Therefore according to that generall power the Lord is said only to be a mover not an hardner of the heart Some other way therefore yet must be found out whereby the Lord is said to harden the heart QUEST XXVIII How the Lord is said indeed to harden the heart TO conclude then this question of all these wayes before rehearsed which are ten in all I make choice of these three which may fully satisfie every doubt namely the third in the 17. quest before the fift in the 20. quest and the sixt in the 21. The first is that God is said to harden the heart by leaving it to it selfe and depriving it of his necessary grace as God is said to have given over the unbeleeving Gentiles to their hearts lusts Rom. 1.24 The second that beside this God causeth many things to be done which are not in themselves causes of the hardning of the heart yet the wicked take occasion thereby further to bee indurate and hardned as S. Paul sheweth how the wicked abuse the patience and long suffering of God thereby to be further hardned Thirdly God by his just judgement Cum suum in malum quâ— ipse ultro ruit amplius ad finem usque impellit doth force him to his owne hurt whither hee runneth headlong himselfe even unto the end Iun. Aâ—aâ—ysâ—n 7. cap. Exod. God as a just Judge seeing a mans heart to bee bent upon wickednesse doth as a just Judge inflict upon him the spirituall punishment of induration To this purpose Augustine handling that place Rom. 1. how the Lord gave up the Gentiles to their owne lusts useth this distinction that some things there rehearsed are sinnes and no punishment as the pride and vanity of their mindes vers 21. They were not thankefull but became vaine in their imagination Some a punishment and no sinne as eternall death which they were worthy of vers 31. the rest that came betweene are both sinnes and punishments By this distinction Augustine in another place answereth this objection of the Pelagians God say they should not take such punishment of sinne Vt peccator per vindictam plura committeret That the sinners thereby commit more sinne Augustine answereth to this effect Sic ostendit ista esse peccata ut etiam poenae fint peccatorum he sheweth these so to be sinnes as that they are also punishments of sinnes as the Apostle there saith vers 27. Man with man wrought filthinesse and received to themselves such recompence of their error as was meet So the meaning of Augustine is that God did not send them upon the Gentiles as they were sinnes but they are to be considered as punishments of their sinnes as God hath an hand therein Likewise whereas Iulian the Pelagian objected that Per patientiam divinam sunt non per potentiam desideriis traditi That they were delivered over to their lusts not by the power but by the patience of God Augustine to shew the contrarie giveth instance of that place Ezech. 14.9 When it is said If the Prophet be deceived I have deceived him Patientia an potentia est Is it the patience or the power of God that doth this And concerning the hardning of Pharaohs heart Augustine concludeth thus Deus ejus voluntatem proprio suo vito malam in hoc peccatum judicio suo justo occulto inclinavit God did incline his will being evill by it owne faulâ— into this sinne by his just yet secret judgement If God did incline it he did more than suffer it or minister the occasion only whereby it was inclined Hierome expresseth as much by this similitude Vnus est solis calor secundùm essentias subjacentes alia liquefacit alia indurat liquatur cera induratur lutum there is buâ— one kinde of heate in the Sunne and according to the matter which it worketh upon some things it melteth some things it hardneth the wax is melted the clay hardned Origene also useth the same similitude and applieth it thus Sic indurasse dicitur Deus cor Pharaoniâ— quia cor ejus secundùm ea quae cogitabat luteum limosum erat So God as the Sunne hardneth the clay is said to have hardned Pharaohs heart because his heart according to those things which he thought was earthly and muddy And in another place he bringeth in this Simile Vt eodem opere plâ—viae terra diligenter exculta affert bonos fructus inculta tribulos as by the same worke of the raine the earth being well tilled bringeth forth good fruit and the untilled thistles Like as then the Sun hardneth the clay the raine bringeth forth weedes not of it selfe but by reason of the nature of the thing concurring whereupon it worketh so by the working of God after a most secret and hid manner the hearts of the wicked are hardned but the cause thereof is in themselves And thus much shall suffice of this question see it handled before 2. Doct. chap. 7. and
was the same both under the law of Moses and 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 exceâ—d 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 Aâ—amas 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 〈◊〉 and persons for as well hee might bee said to be changed in the changing of other 〈◊〉 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
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 corrumpi◠〈◊〉 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 nocumenâ—a 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 juriscâ—nsu 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 probrosâ—m 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
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 Cliteâ—nestra 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 fâ—cerit 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 wiâ—hing 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
all the smaller cattell as well sheepe and goats as lambâ— and 〈◊〉 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 frequâ—ntius furtâ— subtraâ—ebantur 〈◊〉 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 hâ—c dominium majus â—adacia 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 〈…〉 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 〈…〉 he loseth his oxe and the labour of his oxe this reason also is approved by Oleaster 〈◊〉 Gallasâ—â—â— But Tostatus taketh this exception that iâ— the losse of the oxeus labour â—e 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 â—ase he was to pay but two-fold qu. 2. The answer here is ready because where the oxe is found though thâ—â—e â—e 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 〈◊〉 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 â—n â—ssistance 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 Solâ—â— which the Romans also inserted into their twelve Tables to be altogether approved aâ—â—â—ing 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
procured three waies One is the ordinarie meanes whereby Satan 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 Laque◠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 qu◠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
in minutias secare peccata Wee must divide our sinnes into small peeces that is confesse them particularly unto God Procop. 5. And as this perfume was only to be offered unto God so our prayers must only be directed unto him Osiander QUEST XLII How the Lord talked with Moses in the Mercie seat whether in any visible shape Vers. 36. WHere I will meet with thee c. 1. That is in the Arke of the Testimony before mentioned not in the Altar of incense because as Lyranus saith the voice of the Lord was heard from the Mercie seat thither for neither did it belong unto Moses but unto Aaron to offer incense and the Lord used to speake unto Moses not from the Altar of incense but from the Mercie seat Numb 7.89 Tostat. quaest 16. 2. But though in this he correcteth Lyranus upon good ground yet he himselfe is more grossely deceived that Moses who was privileged at all times to goe into the most holy place videbat effigiem quâ— apparebat in propitiatorio c. he saw a certaine shape which appeared in the Mercie seat which was an Angell in a bodily appearance And for this cause he saith the high Priest when he went into the most holy place was with a cloud of incense to cover the Mercie seat Levit. 16.13 that the Angell in that visible shape might not be seene Tostat. qu. 17. Contra. 1. God could frame a voice from the Mercy seat without any such visible apparition therefore it is superfluous to imagine any such 2. Neither is it more like that Moses saw any image in the most holy place than he did in mount Horeb Deut. 4.15 3. The cloud of incense was to cover the Mercie seaâ— not to that end but for reverence of the place that the high Priest should not gaze upon Gods seat 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. That it is lawfull to number the people upon just occasion Vers. 12. WHen thou takest the sum of the children of Israel c. It is not then unlawfull for Princes to take the numbers of their people either to make choice of such as are fit for warre or for the imposition of moderate and necessary taxes and subsidies As here this people are numbred to levy a certaine summe toward the maintenance of the Tabernacle Servius Bullus is noted to have beene the first that brought in this order of summing and mustering the people in the Romane Common-wealth which as a politike device may safely be reteined now of Christian Magistrates so that they do it not with ostentation as rejoycing in the numbers of the people and as it were placing their confidence therein which was Davids fault when he caused Ioab to number the people 2 Sam. 24. Simler But Kings when they see their people to multiply and increase may thereby be stirred up to give the praise unto God as the Wise-man saith In the multitude of the people is the honour of a King and for want of people commeth the destruction of the Prince Prov. 14.28 2. Doct. God is no accepter of persons Vers. 15. THe rich shall not passe and the poore shall not diminish from halfe a sicle This sheweth that God is no accepter of persons that the poore as well as the rich doe belong unto him therefore God would have the poore to pay as much as the rich lest they might have thought themselves to be lesse deare in Gods sight So the Apostle saith There is neither Iew nor Grecian there is neither bond nor free there is neither male nor female for ye are all one in Christ Iesus Galath 3.28 Marbach 3. Doct. The Ministers of the word are to be competently maintained Vers. 16. ANd put it to the use of the Tabernacle Here the common charge of the Tabernacle and the things thereunto belonging lieth upon the contribution of the people which sheweth how ready and carefull all sorts of men ought to be in maintenance of the Lords house for he that is borne to inherit heaven must thinke himselfe borne to maintaine â—he meanes that lead us unto heaven Men are carefull to maintaine their labouring beasts which worke for their corporall food as the Apostle to this purpose alleageth that text out of the Law Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the oxe that treadeth out the corne 1 Cor. 9.9 much more should the Ministers of Gods word be maintained which labour for the food of our soules To this purpose B. Babingt 5. Places of controversie 1. Controv. Against the invocation of Saints Vers. 8. THe perfume shall be perpetually before the Lord c. As this perfume was only to be censed to the Lord which signifieth the prayers of the Saints so God only through Christ must be invocated this honour must not be given unto any other Simler for God only must be beleeved upon as our blessed Saviour saith Yee beleeve in God beleeve also in mee Ioh. 14.1 And men cannot call on him in whom they have not beleeved Rom. 10.14 2. Controv. Against superstitious censing of Churches NOw seeing that this perfume and incense was a type of the spirituall sacrifices and prayers of the faithfull Psal. 141.2 Apocal. 8.3 which types and figures are now ceased the superstition here of the Romanists and Grecians is discovered that use censers and censing still in their Churches not as a civill thing for reverence and decencie but as a part of their religious service which seeing it is now abrogate with other shadowes the body being come Coloss. 2.17 I say with Gallasius Caret testimoniâ— verbi merum hominis commentum est It wanteth the testimony of the word and is a meere device of man 3. Controv. Of the superstitious use of washing the hands among the Romanists Vers. 21. SO they shall wash their hands c. The Romanists have the like use who when they addresse themselves to consecrate the host and to approach unto the Altar doe wash their fingers muttering these words of the Prophet David Psal. 26.6 I will wash mine hands in innocencie O Lord and compasse thine Altar The like fashion was retained among the Gentiles among whom it was counted an impious thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with unwashen hands to handle holy things But this outward ceremony did not make the idolatrous service of the Heathen acceptable so neither is the superstitious worship of the Romanists thereby justified who while they wash their hands coenam Christi profanant c. doe profane Christs supper and take away the fruitfull application and efficacie of his death by instituting a new sacrifice Gallas And as Pilate washed his hands yet delivered Christ over to be crucified so they wash their hands and yet doe crucifie Christ daily in the Masse in offering him up still in sacrifice 4. Controv. Against the superstitious Chrisme of the Romanists Vers. 29. ANd thou shalt make of it the oile of holy ointment c. This holy ointment was a type and figure of the spirituall
God could be made with mens hands 5. Therefore the plurall 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 iâ—spicis 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
the owner is to die when his ox goareth any to death 66. 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 differeâ—h 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