Origen hom 8. Genes The Apostle only saith that he considered that God was able to raise him up even from the dead but that God would doe it so presently he knew not neither had it beene such a triall of his faith to sacrifice his sonne if hee had beene sure that his sonne should in that instant have beene restored againe to life 6. I thinke rather that Abraham being generally by faith assured of Gods power yet was ignorant in this particular what would fall out and therefore spake as a man amazed and astonished and yet ignorantly prophesied Prophetavit quod ignoravit Ambr. Iun. QVEST. XI Of Abrahams constancy and Isaacks obedience Vers. 7. MY Father c. 1. Abrahams setled constancy appeareth that notwithstanding these amiable words of his sonne yet cannot be turned from his purpose nomina vâ—tae solent operarigratiam non ministerium necis words of life as to call father sonne doe insinnuate grace and savour they minister occasion of death 2. Isaacks obedience is commended who willingly submitteth himselfe 1. beeing now 25 yeares old and so strong enough to resist his old and weake father yet he yeeldeth himselfe Calvin 2. He was bound not that his resistance should be feared but least any involuntarie motion by the pangs of death might have beene procured Perer. 3. his willingnesse further appeareth in that Isaack maketh no request for his life nemo rogat nemo se excusat neither he entreateth nor his father excuseth this fact Poets doe fable how Iphigenia Agamemnons daughter was sacrificed to the gods for the safety of the whole armie but here we have a true stistory 4. It is most like that Abraham had before declared Gods commandement unto Isaack to the which hee was obedient Iosephus proceedeth further to shew what the communication was betweene them but whence knoweth he that it is out of doubt that Isaack was made acquainted with Gods counsell wherewith hee rested contented Luther QVEST. XII Why the Lord would not have Isaack offered up in sacrifice though he so commanded for the triall of Abrahams faith Vers. 11. THe Angell of the Lord called to him 1. I will omit here to make any long mention of the fables of the Hebrewes how that Sathan appeared in the shape of an old man to Abraham and againe to Sarah and in the likenesse of a young man to Isaack to draw them from obedience to Gods commandement but he prevailed not Muscul. 2. The heathen also by their poeticall fictions 〈◊〉 obscured the credit and truth of this history for as the Angell of God appeared in this last and extreme point to Abraham so they have also counterfeited the apparition of their gods in extreme perils Calvin 3. Thus it pleased God that although Abrahams faith was tried with this hard Commandement that it should not be performed 1. for his owne glory sake lest that Abrahams God might have beene traduced among the heathen as a lover of humane bloud 2. for Abrahams sakes that the Lord might more amply reward him for his faithfull obedience 3. for our sakes that we might have the example of faithfull Abraham to follow 4. and for the generall instruction of Christians that this might bee a lively figure unto them of the sacrifice of Christ both of Gods love in giving him to dye for the world and his obedience in humbling himselfe to the altar of the crosse And therefore Ambrose fitly applyeth those words of Abraham v. 8. God will provide him a lamb for a burnt offering to the sacrifice of Christ which was that alia hostia quam Deus pararet that other offering which God would provide lib. 1 de Abrah c. 8. QVEST. XIII How the Lord saith I know now that thou fearest c. Vers. 12. NOw I know c. 1. Not that God is ignorant of any thing or can have any experimentall knowledge of any thing which hee knew not before for all things are naked in his sight 2. Neither as Augustine expoundeth is God said to know quia fecit ut sibi Abraham innotesceret because he made Abraham to be knowne to himselfe qu. Genes 58. for then he should have rather said Now thou thy selfe knowest c. 3. Some doe take it for the knowledge of approbation I have knowne thee that is approved this fact of thine as it is said Psal. 1. The Lord knoweth the way of the righteous Hillary 4. Some referre it to Gods eternall knowledge I have knowne from the beginning that thou shouldest doe this thing but I appointed it to be done only now but this had beene no commendation to Abraham for thus God may be said to know every thing whether commendable or otherwise T. hom Angel 5. Wherefore the Lord speaketh here humanitus after the phrase of man and by a metaphor Iun. and in effect it is nothing else but that Abraham had now declared and testified his faith by his fruitfull obedience Calvin as Chrysostome saith Nunc omnibus declarasti quomodo Deâ—m syncere colas thou hast made manifest to all that thou sincerely worshippest God hom 47. in Gen. QVEST. XIV Why this fact of Abraham is rather ascribed to feare than love Vers. 12. THat thou fearest God It is so said rather than that thou lovest God 1. because the love of God must be joyned with a reverent feare of God serve the Lord with feare Psal. 4. and the love of God bringeth forth a filiall and dutifull feare as the child that loveth his father will also feare him 2. the feare of God is generally taken not for the particular act of feare but for the whole worship of God as Psal. 25.14 The secrets of the Lord is revealed to those that feare him and so feare in this sense comprehendeth also love 3. because Abraham had now forgotten his naturall love and affection toward his sonne because he feared God this act is more properly ascribed to his religious feare Per. QVEST. XV. This fact of Abraham wherein it excelleth the like among the heathen NOw concerning the excellency of Abrahams fact whereas the heathen objected the like examples among them to obscure this resolution of Abraham as how Codrus of Athens offered himselfe for his people and one Idomeneus King of Creet as he came from the battell of Troy being in a great tempest upon the sea did vow unto Neptune the first thing which came forth to meet him which was his sonne and so he did Marius is mentioned by Cyril against Iulian that sacrificed his sonne so the Scripture recordeth that inhumane facti of the King of Moab that did offer up his sonne in sacrifice 2 King 4. It shall now appeare what great difference there is between these examples and the fact of Abraham both in the difficulty of the object the readinesse of his affection the end also and purpose of the action 1. Abraham offred up his only sonne whom hee dearely loved being the sonne of his old age a vertuous and obedient sonne
then a briefe catalogue of Esaus of-spring comming betweene the story returneth to Iacob and his generations Iun. Among the which Moses insisteth upon Ioseph as the most worthy QUEST II. Ioseph sold into Egypt while Isaack was alive Vers. 2. WHen Ioseph was 17. yeare old c. 1. Whereas the death of Isaack is mentioned before c. 35. when hee was 180. yeare old and Iacob 120. who was but 60. yeare younger then Isaack this storie of Iosephs selling into Egypt when he was but 17. yeare old must needes goe before Isaacks death 12. or 13. yeare for if Iacob when Ioseph was 39. that is 30. yeare old when he stood before Pharao and nine yeare more that is counting 7. yeares of plentie and two of famine if Iacob were then 130. Gen. 47.9 then at Iosephs seventeene Iacob exceeded not 108. yeares But hee was 120. when Isaack died and then was Ioseph 31. yeare old or there about 2. Now where it is added beeing yet a childe 1. Neither need we with Ramban to transpose the word and ioyne it with his yeares and reade thus when Ioseph was a child of 17. yeares for the order of the text will not beare it to be so transposed 2. Neither is that the best reading to say and the child was with the sonnes of Bilha c. aâ— B.G. doe reade but with a parenthesis thus being yet a child 3. which is added not to signifie his age expressed before nor yet that he was as a servant and minister to his father and brethren as the word â—â—guar somtime signifieth as Iosua is called puer Mosis Moses boy Iun. but to declare the simplicitie of his mind that he did not of malice accuse his brethren Mercer and the puritie of his affection that at those yeares could not abide sinne Rupert and crueltie of his brethren that dealt so hardly with him being a child Chrysost. And beside his age is mentioned to shew how long a time Ioseph continued in miserable captivitie full 14. yeares from 17. till he was 30. for so old he was when he stood before Pharao Perâ—â— QUEST III. Why Ioseph keepeth with the sons of the handmaides Vers. 2. WIth the sonnes of Zilphah and of Bilhah Ioseph keepeth sheepe with the sonnes of Iacobs concubines rather than the other 1. Not because as Rasi thinketh the sonnes of Leah despised the sonnes of the handmaides and therefore Ioseph ioyneth himselfe unto them not scorning them for then these sonnes of the handmaides would haue beene the readiest to have delivered Ioseph whereas Ruben and Iudah the sonnes of Leah were his best friends 2. Therefore Iacob committeth Ioseph to their custodie because the other brethren of Leah could not well brooke the sonnes of Rachel whom Iacob loved better then their mother Ramban and beside Rachel beeing dead Ioseph was as Bilhas sonne and her children were as Rachels and so brethren to Ioseph as both by father and mothers side Muscul. he kept companie also with Zilphas sonnes because it seemeth the sonnes of the handmaides sorted together QUEST IIII. What sin it was whereof Ioseph accused his brethren to his father ANd Ioseph brought to their father their evil saying 1. The other brethren accused not Ioseph to theiâ— father as the Septuagint in some translations reade but Ioseph accused them whereupon they hated him 2. Neither did Ioseph only complaine of the handmaids sonnes as Cajetan though it may be thought that their servile nature was most prone to euil but of the rest also for they all hated him Iun. 3. That which he complained of was not 1. Either any wrong done to himselfe as Vatablus 2. Not of any particular sinne as the Latin translator readeth as either of the sinne of Sodomitrie as Rupertus 3. Or of the incest of Ruben as gloss interlinear for Ruben afterward was Iosephs best friend 4. Or of that horrible sinne of bestiall copulation as Tostat. Thom. it is not like that Iacobs sonnes though licentious enough were so filthilie geven 5. Or that they did eate raw flesh contrarie to the precept of Noah as the Hebrewes 6. But I rather thinke that he brought to Iacob their evil fame or report as the word signifieth that is complained generally of their evil life for the which they were infamous as either their contention among themselves or defiling themselves with the daughters of the heathen or such like Mercer Perer. QUEST V. Whether Ioseph did well in accusing his brethren to their father NOw lest Ioseph might be thought to have dealt uncharitablie with his brethren in accusing them to his father for this is one of the titles giuen unto Sathan who is called an accuser of the brethren Apocal. 12. 1. It is to be considered that Ioseph might first privately admonish them before he told his father although it be not in the scripture directly expressed Tostat. 2. Or it may seeme that praemonitiâ— non fuit necessaria cum crimen esset publicum admonition was not necessarie where the crime waâ— publike Thom. 3. Or Ioseph did perceive that his admonition would not prevaile but that they would have hated him the more as the wise man saith Reproove a scorâ—er and hee will hate thee Prov. 9. and in this case one may forbeare private admonition as Augustine well noteth Si vel opportuniâ—s â—â—mpus querit vel metuit â—e deteriores efficiantur if either hee watch a fitter time or bee afraid they should wax worse in such cases to refraine and not for feare of displeasure or any temporall losse it is consilium charitatis a charitable consideration 4. It may be observed that Ioseph did not publish or divulgate abroad to every one his brethrens sinnes but only informed his father for otherwise as Augustine Si coram omnibus â—is arguere non eris correptâ—r sed proditâ—r c. If thou wilt reproove before all what thâ—â— knowest by thy brother thou shalt not bee a reproover but a betrayer sâ—r 16. de verb. domin 5. Ioseph did not accuse his brethren of a maliâ—ious minde being yet in a manner but a childe but of a desire to haue them amended for as Augustine saith Debemuâ— amando corripere non nocendi â—viditute sâ—d studio câ—rrigâ—ndi Wee must reproove in lovâ— not in a desire to hurt but a studie to correct QUEST VI. Whether Iacob loved Ioseph chiefly because he was borne in his old age Vers. 3. ISrael loved Ioseph because he was the sonne of his old age 1. We need not with Rupertus to understand this mystically by Israels old age his perfection of vertue and that therefore he loved Ioseph best because he did imitate his fathers vertue 2. Nor yet with Onkelâ—s and Paul Burgens doe we referre it to Ioseph that he was the childe of old age that is a wise sober and grave childe for this is coact and strained 3. But indeed Iacob loved him because he had him in his old age being then 91. yeare old when Ioseph was borne
Hexapla in Genesin Exodum THAT IS A sixfold commentary upon the two first Bookes of Moses being GENESIS and EXODVS WHEREIN THESE TRANSLATIONS are compared together 1. The Chalde 2. The Septuagint 3. The vulgar Latine 4. Pagnine 5. Montanus 6. Iunius 7. Vatablus 8. The great English Bible 9. The Geneva edition And 10. The Hebrew originall Together with a sixfold Vse of every Chapter shewing 1. The Method or Argument 2. The divers readings 3. The explanation of difficult questions and doubtfull places 4. The places of doctrine 5. Places of confutation 6. Morall observations In which worke about three thousand Theologicall questions are discussed above forty Authors old and new abridged and together comprised whatsoever worthy of note either Mercerus out of the Rabbines Pererius out of the Fathers or Marlorat out of the new Writers have in their learned Commentaries collected Now the fourth time imprinted with the Authors corrections before his death By ANDREW WILLET Minister of the Gospell of Iesus Christ. IOHN 5.46 47. Moses wrote of mee but if you beleeve not his writings how shall yee beleeve my words LONDON ¶ Printed by Iohn Haviland and are sold by Iames Boler at the signe of the Marigold in Pauls Church-yard 1633. Hexapla in Genesin THAT IS A SIXFOLD COMMENTARIE UPON GENESIS Wherein six severall Translations that is the Septuagint and the Chalde two Latine of Hierome and Tremelius two English the Great Bible and the Geneva Edition are compared where they differ with the Originall Hebrew and Pagnine and Montanus interlinearie interpretation TOGETHER WITH A SIXFOLD USE of every Chapter shewing 1. The Method or Argument 2. the divers readings 3. the explanation of difficult questions and doubtfull places 4. the places of doctrine 5. places of confutation 6. Morall observations WHEREIN ABOVE A THOVSAND THEOLOGICALL questions are discussed and is comprised together whatsoever worthy of note either Mercerus out of the Rabbines Pererius out of the Fathers Marlorat out of the new Writers have in their learned Commentaries collected Divided into two Tomes and published to the glory of God and the furtherance of all those that desire to read the Scripture with profit Now the third time revised corrected and with divers additions enlarged By ANDREW WILLET Minister of the Gospell of Iesus Christ. IOHN 5.46 47. Moses wrote of me but if you beleeve not his writings how shall ye beleeve my words AMBROS EPIST. 41. Deambulabat Deus in Paradiso c. nunc deambulat in Paradiso Deus quando Scripturas lego Paradisus Genesis in quo virtutes pullulant Patriarcharum Paradisus Deuteronomium in quo germinant legis praecepta God sometime walked in Paradise c. and now God walketh in Paradise when I read the Scriptures Genesis is a Paradise wherein the vertues of the Patriakes doe branch forth Deuteronomie is a Paradise wherein the precepts of the Law doe sprout forth LONDON ¶ Printed by the Assignes of THOMAS MAN PAVL MAN and IONAH MAN 1632. TO THE HIGH AND MIGHTIE RIGHT VERTVOVS AND MOST CHRISTIAN PRINCE King IAMES our dread Soveraigne by the grace of God King of Great Britaine of France and Ireland Defender of the Christian faith MOST gracious Soveraigne as under the shadow of your Highnesse great and mighty tree I meane your Princely and peaceable government the goodly beasts of the field honourable and great persons doe solace themselves so the fowles of heaven and the little birds doe sit and sing in the branches thereof and there build their neasts and lay their young and I among the rest have brought forth my implumed and unfeathered birds those imperfect workes which heretofore I have dedicated to your excellent Majestie and now this which wanteth but the wings of your Highnesse favour to flie abroad To your pious and sacred Majestie therefore I here present this absolute Tractate upon Genesis such as hath not beene yet in respect of the order matter and manner set forth vpon this booke wherein whatsoever questions of weight are discussed and other necessarie matters added as the short preface following sheweth This my third work to your highnesse I here in all humility exhibite and offer as an unfained pledge of our hearty joy for the joyfull entrance of this third yeare of your Majesties happy reigne This divine booke of Genesis as Ambrose advised Augustine to read the Prophesie of Isaias Augustine sendeth Volusianus to the Apostles writings I would commend in the first place as it is in order first to be read of all the Scriptures wherein are declared and set forth the beginning of the world and the progresse thereof the punishment of the wicked and rewards of the righteous so many examples and enticements to vertue such judgements and dehortations from sin and the same so lively and effectuall â—s if they were now presently done before our eyes as Augustine saith of this historie of Genesis I know not how but as often as it is read the hearer is so affected as though the thing were even now effected This worthy history containeth the space of 2368. yeares above halfe the age of the world from the first to the second Adam It insisteth principally in setting forth the life and acts of six honourable Fathers as starres among the rest Adam Noah Abraham Isaack Iacob Ioseph from all these your Majestie may receive somewhat with Adam who in Enos time when religion decayed taught his sonnes apart from the wicked to call upon the name of God your princely care must bee that you and your people as separated from the superstition of the world should worship the Lord more purely with Noah God hath raised you up to bring rest and comfort to his Church as another Abram the Lord hath made you an high Father as Isaack to procure joy and laughter to the Church as Iacob a supplanter of Popish superstition as Ioseph to adde what is wanting in the Church or Common-wealth Much bound unto God is this Church and Common-wealth for your Highnesse peaceable and religious government that whereas we for our sins had deserved with Israel neither to have King nor Church as the Prophet Hoshea saith We have no King because we feared not the Lord and againe in the same place the thorne and thistle shall grow upon their Altars yet the Lord in mercy hath blessed us with both We praise God for your princely vertues your worthy clemencie equity bountie piety which doe shine in your Majestie as the pretious stones in the King of Tyrus garment your gracious clemencie is as a cordiall unto this land which having remitted some great offences must needs passe by smaller trespasses If David pardoned Shemeis rayling he could not but forgive Mephiboseths negligence Your princely peace made abroad doth give us hope of a peaceable state at home as Davids favour toward Abner a reconciled enemie was a signe of grace to Barzillai an ancient friend what would we have
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 kiâ—led 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 Râ—ine-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 orâ—inarily 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 Tâ—status 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 Cajeâ—â—n 2. It also putteth Sara in minde of her subjection to Abraham whereof the veile is a signe 1 Cor. 11. â—0 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 Vâ—â—s 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 â—lohim 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
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 because
because the oracles which they gave were many times uncertaine and false It is true that some teraphim were used for such purpose to consult withall as Zachar. 10.2 The teraphim have spoken vanity but yet all were not so used as the teraphim which was in Davids house 5. And yet upon this example it cannot bee gathered that there were some teraphim which were not idols as Ramban inferreth and Perer. numer 4. for although David himselfe were farre from idolatry and idols in Sauls time were publikely removed yet there might be some reliques of superstition privately remaining and this in Davids house might bee secretly kept by Michâ—l without Davids knowledge or it was as an implement not regarded Mercer 6. Wherefore it is most like that these teraphim did resemble an humane shape and that they were consecrated to superstitious uses as those idols of Laban were which he therefore afterward called his gods vers 30. QUEST VII Wherefore Rachel stole away her fathers idols IT is further questioned wherefore Rachel stole away Labans idols 1. Not as some thinke that Laban should not consult with them to know which way Iacob was gone sic Aben Ezra Tostat. for though Laban missed them presently that is to be imputed to his superstition who did often visit his idols 2. Neither did Rachel this to revoke her father from idolatry as Rab. Salomon to whom give consent Basil Nazianzene Theodoret for then shee needed not to have beene ashamed of her fact neither would Iacob so sharply have censured the fact to bee worthy of death 3. Nor yet did Rachel steale them away being made of some precious metall that it might be some recompence unto her for part of her dowry Perer. numer 7. for this had beene plaine theft 4. Neither yet as Iosephus thinketh did Rachel carry away her fathers gods that if he should pursue after them haberat quâ— confugeret 〈◊〉 impetratura she might have recourse unto them to aske pardon and to appease her fathers wrath for this had beene plaine idolatry 5. Nor yet was this done by way of mystery as Gregory collecteth that as Laban found noâ— his idols with Iacob sic diabolus ostensis mundi thesauris in Redemptore nostro vestigia â—â—rena 〈◊〉 non invenit so the devill having shewed the treasures of the world did not finde in our Redeemer any footsteps of terrene concupiscence c. 6. But it is most like that Rachel though much reformed and reclaimed from her fathers superstition by her husbands instruction yet was somewhat touched therewith still and therefore of a superstitious mind did take away her fathers idols and hereof it was that long after able Iacob reforming his house caused all the strange gods to be removed sic Chrysostom hom 47. in Genes Mercerus Calvin QUEST VIII Whether Rachel were any thing addicted to superstitious worship BUt some are of contrary opinion that Rachel was not aâ— all addicted to her fathers superstition whose reasons are these 1. Because Rachel did worship God and prayed unto him Genes 29.22 God remembred Rachel and heard her and if she had purposed to worship these idols she would not have used them so irreverently to have sate upon them c. Theodoret. qu. 89. in Genes Cont. Though Rachel were a worshipper of God yet she might have her imperfections and some reliqâ—â— of superstition might remaine Iacobs family professed the worship of God and yet there were found amongst theâ— strange Gods Genes 35. 4. Neither is Rachels gesture to bee much regarded in such a necessity rather her superstitious minde may therein appeare how she was addicted to those images seeing she sought excuses to keepe them still her manner of sitting was no signe of irreverence but it served for an excuse both to pacifie her fathers wrath which she feared and to with-hold those superstitious monuments still which she loved 2. Wherefore it is more like that Rachel was not free from all touch of superstition both because she had beene a long time trained up under a superstitious father and could not so easily forget her manner of education though much qualified with Iacobs instruction as also for that wee reade that a good while after such images and mammets were found in Iacobs house Gen. 35. which are like to have beene these which Rachel had stollen from her father sic Chrysostom ex pontiâ—i Cajetan Oleaster ex nostris Musculus Mercer Calvin QUEST IX How Iacob is said to have stollen away Labans heart Vers. 20. THâ—s Iacob stole away the heart of Laban c. 1. This word is not taken as 2 Sam. 15.6 where it is said that Absolon stole away the heart of the people from David the meaning cannot be so here for Labans heart was not toward Iacob 2. Neither because Rachel had stollen away his teraphim where Labans heart was for Iacob yet knew not that 3. Neither yet it is so said because the hope of Labans heart was gone Iacob being departed who was so profitable to him 4. But because Iacob gave no notice of his going he is said to steale away his heart that is to deceive and disappoint him and secretly convey himselfe away It is therefore rather to bee read to steale away from his heart for so the word ceth sometime signifieth as Gen. 44.4 when they went out of the city jutâ—â—â— ceth hagnor QUEST X. What river it was that Iacob passed Vers. 21. HE passed the river that is Euphrates 1. Sometime it is called the great river Iosu. 1.4 sometime the river without any addition Iosu. 24.3 and in this place 2. For three causes is the river called great and so much celebrated in Scripture 1. For that it was the greatest river beside Nilus that was knowne to the Jewes 2. For that it was one of the rivers of Paradise 3. Because it was the bounds of that large land of Canaan promised to Abrahams seed Genes â—5 18 Perer. 3. Iacob is said to passe the river as declining the ordinary way fearing left Laban might overtake him Mercer QUEST XI How the 7. dayes of Labans pursuit are to be accounted Vers. 23. HE followed after him 7. dayes journey 1. These 7. dayes must not bee accounted from Iacobs first setting forth as Rasi thinketh for Iacob being three dayes journey from Laban who was now gone to sheare his sheepe vers 19. which were removed 3. dayes journey from Iacobs flocke Genes 30.36 while the messenges went to tell Laban Iacob was gone â— dayes journey and so was in all six dayes journey before Laban by this reckoning Laban should overtake Iacob in one day from Carras to Gilead which was not possible Laban then overtooke Iacob the seventh day after that he himselfe set forward that is 13. dayes after Iacobs departure Musâ—ul â— Neither with 〈…〉 wee suppose that Laban returned to Carras 〈◊〉 City which was in the 〈◊〉 betweene the two â—â—ockes as hee thinketh to take his friends with him and so to pursue Iacob for the City
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 Bellarmine
Now Abraham and Ismael had not the same people to goe unto the faithfull cannot be said to be Ismaels people nor the prophane sort to be Abrahams But if the meaning of the phrase were no more than that they were gathered and joyned to the state of the dead the faithfull and prophane sort should all goe to one people wherefore this phrase betokeneth a speciall disposition of the soules of the faithfull after this life in being associated to the company of the just and a laying up of their bodies in assured hope of the resurrection Calvin Muscul. Luther The Apostle also sheweth what it is for the righteous to be gathered to their people Wee are come to the celestiall Ierusalem to the innumerable company of Angels to the congregation of the first borne c. to the spirits of just and perfect men Hebr. 12.22.13 To all these are we joyned by faith while we live and really when we are dead now quoad spem in hope then quoad rem in deed 6. Places of morall use 1. Mor. Fathers must rebuke and chastise their children Vers. 4. THou shalt not be excellent Fathers may learne by Iacobs example to chastise their children for their sinnes as here Ruben is censured for defiling his fathers bed for this cause Heli and his posterity were punished because hee did not reprove his sonnes according to the quality of their offence Perer. 2. Mor. Gods vengeance though it be deferred will certainly come FUrther in that Rubens punishment had beene a long time suspended and deferred almost 40. yeeres after he had committed this uncleane sinne yet at the last it commeth let no sinner flatter himselfe in his impunity for if the long suffering of God draw him not to repentance it shall but increase his punishment as the Apostle sheweth Rom. 2.4 5. 3. Mor. The short pleasures of sinne deprive men of many blessings AGaine as Ruben for a little short pleasure lost his birthright and dignity so many for the vaine and momentany pleasures of this life are deprived of many and great blessings like to Esau that for a messe of pottage did part with his birthright 4. Mor. Contumely against parents never goeth unpunished WE see also what an high offence before God it is to offer any wrong or contumely to our parents such was Cham toward Noah Absalon toward David and here Ruben that polluted his father Iacobs bed 5. Mor. Against unjust and immoderate revenge Vers. 7. CVrsed be their wrath The Lord condemneth all kinde of revenge that proceedeth of wrath especially such as here was committed by Simeon and Levi. 1. It was done by craft and subtility under pretence of friendship 2. Against men unawares suspecting nothing 3. When they were in griefe of body 4. With a pretext and shew of religion 5. The revenge farre exceeded in greatnesse the quality of the offence Such a kinde of revenge is unjust and cruell Wherefore in this case wee should follow the Wise-mans counsell Say not I will recompence evill but wait upon the Lord and he shall save thee Prov. 20.22 Perer. 6. Mor. Every mans portion in the earth assigned of God Vers. 13. AS Zabulun shall dwell by the sea side Hence we learne that the lot of men for their habitation and dwelling in the earth falleth not out unto them by chance but by Gods providence and appointment for as it is in the Psalme The earth is the Lords and the fulnesse thereof Psal. 24.1 therefore every one should be contented with his lot and portion as assigned unto him of God Perer. 7. Mor. The Church shall overcome at last Vers. 19. ANd an host of men shall overcome him but he shall overcome at the last c. So the Church of God though it shall indure much trouble and sorrow in the world yet it shall triumph and have the victory in the end as our Saviour saith to his Apostles In the world yee shall have trouble but be of good comfort I have overcome the world Iohn 16.33 8. Mor. The quiet and peaceable end of the righteous Vers. 33. HE plucked up his feet into the bed Before Iacob had raised up himselfe as well as he could not having his legs hanging out of the bed as Perer. that had beene no fit lying for a man ready to dye but he had stretched out himselfe before as well as he could for reverence unto the word of God which he delivered but now feeling the houre of his death to be instant hee doth gather up his legs after a seemely and quiet manner not strugling or striving against death as many doe but as though death â—ere in his power he doth meekely and gently yeeld himselfe unto it such a peaceable and quiet kinde of departure God often granteth to his children Muscul. Howbeit this is not alwayes so for sometime a wicked man may dye like a lambe still and quiet as the Psalme saith There are no bands in his death Psal. 73.4 and a righteous man may have a strong death by reason of the extremity of his sicknesse and the manner of the disease but yet inwardly he hath a peaceable and quiet soule and therefore Balaam had good reason to pray as he did Let me dye the death of the righteous and let my last end be like his Num. 23.10 CHAP. L. 1. The Method and Argument IN this Chapter is set forth 1. Iosephs piety toward his father Iacob in causing him to be embawmed vers 2 3. in his buriall 1. He procured leave of Pharaoh vers 4 5 6. 2. He did honourably accompany him vers 7 8 9. 3. They mourned for him by the way vers 10 11. 4. Then they buried him as he had commanded 2. His humanity toward his brethren with their message in their fathers name vers 14 15 16. their humility vers 18. Iosephs friendly answer vers 19 20 â—â— 3. Iosephs prosperity in seeing his childrens children v. 23. 4. His faithfull departure buriall and age v. 24 25. 2. The divers readings v. 2. he commanded those which had charge of funerals S. commanded the Physitians câ—t v. 4. spake to potentates of Pharaoh S. spake to Pharaohs house caet v. 8. only their kinred they left their sheepe and oxen c. S. their children or little ones caet v. 10. they came to Goren Atad G. to the corne-floore or field beset with thistles T. to the corne-floore of Athad cat of Achad H. athad signifieth a thistle v. 11. Abel Mizraim G. the mourning of the Egyptians cat v. 13. beside Mamre G. before Mamre B. over against Mamre caet against or before the face of Mamre cat v. 19. feare not can we resist Gods will H. for I am Gods S. for I feare God C. am not I under God G. am I God B. am I in the stead of God T.P. 3. The explanation of doubtfull questions and places QUEST I. Of the divers fashions of buriall Vers. 2. ANd Moses commanded his servants
2 Sam. 21.8 He tooke the five sonnes of Michal that is of the sister of Michal for Michal had no children and v. 19. of that chapter Elbanah slew Goliah the Gitâ—ite that is the brother of Goliah Lahmi 1 Chron. 20.5 where the word brother is eclipsed so also in this place Hemor of Sichem where not the word sonne as the common English translations reade it but father as Beza or prince as Iunius must be supplied as Luk. 24.10 we reade Marie of Iames that is the mother of Iames Mark 15.40 So here in this place to supply the sonne of Abraham may as well be admitted as to supply sister or brother in the place before recited 2 Sam. 21.8 19. I leave now the Reader to take his choice Thus the meaning of Stephen is plaine that the Patriarkes were all buried in Sichem and so Hierome testifieth that in his time their monuments and sepulchers were there to bee seene epitaph Paul and whereas Iosephus lib. 2. antiquit c. 4. saith they were buried in Hebron both may be true that they were first translated to Sichem then to Hebron but not by the Sichemites nor yet immediately removed thither out of Egypt But I rather with Beza for this matter admit Hieromes report than Iosephus QUEST XIX Whether Iacob made his purchase with â—â—ney or with lambes BUt whereas it may be objected against this interpretation which understandeth this place of Iacobs purchase that he bought it not for money but for an hundred lambes Genes 33.19 1. I neither thinke with Eugubiâ—â—s that Hierome reading lambes was deceived by the Septuagints translation who at the first as he thinketh did read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 money not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lambes for the Chalde Interpreter also readeth lambes 2. Neither with R. Achibac whom Oleaster followeth doe I thinke the word châ—sâ—tâ— to be â—â—â—rowed of the Arabians who so call their money 3. Nor yet was the money so called chesita a lambe as the Basilian penie is called câ—rvus a raven as Lippâ—man 4. But I rather approve Iunius conjecture that it was a peece of money stamped with the print of a lambe and so it is taken for a peece of coine 〈◊〉 2.11 where it is said that every one of Iobs friends gave him a peece of money and an earing of gold it had beene no great gift to bestow upon him a lambe and the other gift which is joyned with it being of gold doth rather shew that it was money wherefore Stephen in this place doth interpret the other that this purchase was made with that kinde of money rather than with lambes QUEST XX. Of the putting of Iosephs bones in a chest Vers. 26. THey put him in a chest 1. I omit here the Hebrewes fables how that when they could not finde Iosephs tombe to bring it out of Egypt a sheepe spake unto them and shewed where it was whereupon they led the sheepe with them in the wildernesse and therefore say they it is said in the Psalme Thou didst lead thy people like sheepe by the hand of Moses and Aaron 2. The like fable is reported by the Author of histor scholastic that when Nilus had overflowne the place where Iosephs tombe was Moses cast a certaine thin plate of gold into the water wherein hee writ the name Iehovah which floting upon the waters stood still where Iosephs chest was which they tooke up and carried with them out of Egypt and he fableth further that Iosephs bones did prophesie of their difficult and hard journey This fable is worthy no better credit thâ—n the other though Perer. give not the like censure of it 3. Whereas in Ecclesiasticus cap. 49.19 it is said as the vulgar Latine translateth Iosephs bones prophesied after his death which Pererius understandeth of the accomplishment of Iosephs prophecie at his death that God would visit his people the words in the originall are the bones of Ioseph èpesképâ— were visited of God and so the Interlinearie translation readeth 4. Cajetanus thinketh that Iosephs bones were laid up in a marble coffin but it is more like to have beene made of wood as fittest for carriage The Hebrewes also thinke that the Israelites carried but two Arkes in the wildernesse the Arke of the Testament and Iosephs arke or chest But besides that this is great presumption and boldnesse in them to match Gods Arke and Iosephs coffin together it is probable that the rest of the Patriarks bones were carried out of Egypt at the returne of the Israelites and that they were buried in Sechem together with Iosephs for when else should they have beene convoyed thither not before they came out of Egypt for then they would have laid them in Hebron where Iacob was buried rather than in Sechem and after they could not when they were departed out of Egypt And though mention be made only by Moses of the burying of Ioseph in Sechem because he was the more honourable person and to shew how carefully they discharged the oath made to Ioseph yet we doubt not but that according to Stephens report the rest of the Patriarks were translated thither which thing Stephen might know either by undoubted tradition or some authentike bookes now perished as Paul learned that the names of the Magicians in Egypt that resisted Moses were called Iamâ—es and Iâ—mbres 2 Tim. 3.8 4. Places of Doctrine 1. Doct. Righteous mâ—n apt to shed teares Vers. 1. IOseph wept This is now the sixt time that Ioseph is said to weepe Genes 42.24 Genes 43.30 Gen. 45.2 Gen. 46.29 and twice in this chapter vers 15.18 By this the Stoikes are confuted who would have a wise man without compassion or affection Muscul. Also wee see that good men in Scripture were apt to shed teares as Ioseph and David who often in the Psalmes maketh mention of his teares such were the holy Apostles S. Paul Act. 20.19 and S. Peter Matth. 27.57 2. Doct. God turneth evill actions into good Vers. 2. WHen yee thought evill against me God disposed it to good Herein appeareth the mighty power of God who is able to turne evill unto good not that he either winketh at mens evill actions and letteth them alone Calv. neither is he the author approver worker or provoker to evill Mercer but he overruleth even the actions of wicked men and ordereth and disposeth them to what end it pleaseth him as Iudas conspiracie against Christ did serve to execute and bring to passe the determinate counsell of God Act. 2.23 yet are not the workers of evill thereby any thing excusable because Gods will taketh place the good that commeth of an evill action as here the preservation of the Church by Iosephs captivity proceedeth from the goodnesse of God not from any such intendment in the instrument Pererius Therefore Beetius saith well Sola divina vis est cui â—aâ—a quoque bona sunt c. God only can turne evill into good by using evill to bring forth a good
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 adulterâ—i 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 Elibâ—rin Councell that he which having a wife committed adulterie should be under penance five yeeres can 〈◊〉 He that did sinne that way after should not bee received to the peace of the Church till his dying 〈…〉 that did commit adulterie after penance should never be restored to the communion of the Chuâ—â—â— 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 Exodâ—s 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 fecâ—rit 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
the Egyptians would pay and recompence them for all their labour and service in their brick-workes in building of them houses and Cities whereupon the Egyptians casting up their account and finding that their wages at a very meane rate would farre exceed the value of their jewels were contented that the Hebrewes should enjoy them Now if this were so then the equity of this fact will easily appeare but because this tradition is uncertaine neither is there thereof any mention made in Scripture it is not to be stood upon a better satisfaction may be found out 3. Therefore first of all this is sufficient to excuse the Israelites that they did herein as they were commanded and whatsoever the Lord biddeth it is no sinne to doe nay it is sinne not to doe it as Augustine well saith Quod sane faciendo Moses usque adeo non peccavit ut non faciendo peccaret Moses in doing so was so farre from sinning that in not doing of it he had sinned thus also answer Calvin Simler Iun. with others 4. But the equity of this fact may further be evident though it sufficeth only to stand upon Gods will which is alwayes just Et rectissimum est quicquid facit and it is most right whatsoever hee doth Calvin or willeth to be done yet divers other reasons may bee yeelded to justifie this fact of the Israelites beside I say the authority of the Lord in commanding which excuseth the Israelites who were bound to be obedient in whatsoever was commanded as Augustine sheweth by this example like as in a common-wealth the minister or executioner of the Judge in putting him to death that is adjudged to dye offendeth not who if he should doe it of himselfe were a man-slayer so saith he Deo jubenti ministerium prabuerunt they did but yeeld their service and ministry to the commandement of God Beside this justification other reasons may be alleaged both on Gods behalfe and on the peoples First on Gods behalfe 1. He is the supreme and chiefe Lord of all and may by his imperiall right not onely give the substance of one to another but remove and dispossesse Kings and transpose Kingdomes from one to another Simler And therefore as Calvin saith Quae Deo placuit ad suos transferri aliena censeri non debent What God thinketh good to convey over unto his are not to be counted as belonging to another 2. The Egyptians abused their gold and other jewels in serving their idols therewith and so as Augustine saith Dei creatura male utentes ad Creatoris injuriam they wickedly abused the creature to the wrong of the Creator and therefore the Lord might most justly deprive them of that which they abused to his dishonour 3. Their intolerable contumacy and disobedience in refusing so often to obey the Lords commandement to let his people goe deserved no lesse than that they should bee punished with the losse of their precious substance seeing the Lord for the like stubbornenesse and obstinacy of the Cananites dispossessed them of their country and gave it to the Israelites Perer. Secondly in respect of the Israelites these reasons also may be rendred 1. The Israelites might detaine these things which the Egyptians gave them as their wages for their long labour and service in Egypt as it is said Wisdom 10.17 she gave the Saints the reward of their labours and as Philo further amplifieth Nec par est jactura libertatis pecuniae there is not the like reason of the losse of liberty and the losse of money the Israelites lost their liberty the Egyptians lost but part of their substance So the Lord promiseth unto Nebuchadnezzar Egypt for the wages of his army for the service they did in subduing of Tyrus Ezech. 29.18 Thus Israel had the substance of the Egyptians given them for their service Iun. 2. Beside the labour and toile of the Israelites in Egypt they were most cruelly oppressed their children most pitifully slaine and murdered therefore this was in stead of some recompence and satisfaction made for the wrongs which they had done them Perer. 3. Philo addeth this reason also Vt in bello victores victos bonis spoliâ—vâ—rant as being conquerers in battell they spoiled their enemies of their substance for they were as conquerers of the Egyptians not by stroke of battell but by the stroke of the Lords hand in these mighty miracles plagues and judgements whereby the stout and stubborne heart of Pharaoh was subdued Simler 4. Irenaeus saith further Debitores erant Hebraeis non solùm rerum sâ—d vitae suae propter patriarchae Iosâ—phi praecedentem benignitatem They were debters to the Hebrewes not only of their substance but of their life also for the former kindnesse and goodnesse of the patriarke Ioseph shewed unto them who delivered the Egyptians and their land from perishing by famine and governed the country 80. yeeres in all justice peace and tranquillity 5. But the best reason on the behalfe of the Israelites is that the Egyptians did voluntarily give them these things as a redemption of their lives and did wage them thereby to bee gone as Iosephus saith they gave them these things quo celeriùs discederent to hasten their departure the sooner this also may be gathered out of the text chap. 11.8 and 12 13. Iun. QUEST XLIV When the Israelites asked the jewels before the last plague or after ANother question is when the Israelites asked these jewels of the Egyptians at the very instant of their departure or before 1. Augustine and Cajetane consenting with him Ferus Pererius all these are of opinion that this was done before the last plague of the first borne Augustines reason is this Quomodo fieri posset ut in tanto luctu ex mortibus suorum commodarent ista filiis Israel How could it be that in so great heavinesse for the death of their children they would lend these things to the Israeliâ—es quaest 45. in Exod. But this might be a reason to make them willing to let them have what they desired to bee rid of them for they were afraid all of them of their lives if the Israelites had stayed still for they said we dye all vers 33. Cajetane would gather that they had borrowed these things before and the Egyptians through griefe forgetting to demand them againe the Israelites also being in haste carried them away because it is said they spoiled the Egyptians that is by carrying away the things which they had formerly borrowed But these words rather make against him for in that the Israelites are said then at their going away to have spoiled the Egyptians it sheweth that then they received the things of them whereof they spoiled them for otherwise they had spoiled them before when they received the things not purposing to restore them againe Ferus reason is because it is not like they would lend the Israelites their jewels at their going away But this doubt is removed because the text
should not be soone provoked because rage is a sinne before God and so deserveth punishment and for that every man desireth libertie but he that is given to anger is not Dominus sui ipsius Master of himselfe 2. He must take heed ut 〈◊〉 in ira permaneat that he continue not long in anger Psal. 4. Be angrie and sinne not Ephes. 4. Let not the Sunne goe downe upon your wrath 3. Men must bee carefull ne procedat primò in corde that anger proceed not first in the heart for then it turneth to hatred and he that hateth his brother is a manslayer for Se interficit spoliando se charitate alium He killeth himselfe by spoyling himselfe of charitie and another also 4. Ne procedat in verbo It must not proceed in word for he which calleth his brother foole is in danger of hell fire Matth. 5. 5. Ne procedat in opere It must not proceed unto the deed for in every worke wee must consider two things Facere justitiam misericordiam To doe justice and shew mercie but he which is angrie can doe neither For the first the Apostle saith that the wrath of 〈◊〉 doth not accomplish the righteousnesse of God Iam. 1.20 It is reported of Plato that hee should say to his servant that had offended him Punirem te nisi essem iratus I would punish thee if I were not angrie And he that is angrie can shew no mercie as it is said of Simeon and Levi in their rage they killed a man Gen. 49. Thom. in opuscul QUEST VIII Of rayling and reviling NExt unto the inward rage and heat of the affections followeth the outward indignation expressed by words gesture and other signes and the third degree is when men fall to plaine railing backbiting slandering threatning as these three are thus expressed by our blessed Saviour Whosoever is angrie with his brother unadvisedly shall be culpable of judgement and whosoever saith unto his brother racha shall be worthie to be punished by a counsell and whosoever shall say thou foole shall be worthie to be punished with hell fire Matth. 5.22 1. Here our Saviour maketh three degrees of anger or rage the one in the sudden heat and boyling of the affection inwardly without cause the second in the shewing of this indignation outwardly by any disdainfull words as in calling one racha that is idle head light braine for so rik in the Hebrew to the which this Syrian word agreeth both in sound and sense signifieth light value Iun. Matth. 5.22 As also this indignation may bee expressed by other signes as by grinning frowning spitting and such like Simler Then the third degree followeth in open railing as calling one foole with other termes of reviling 2. As our Saviour maketh difference of the sins so also he sheweth divers degrees of punishment alluding unto the politike forme of judgement for first there was the session or judgement of three who judged of small causes then of 23. who determined more waightie matters then of 71. before whom the high Priest or a false Prophet and sometime a whole tribe was convented and judged Beza So he that is angrie shall be censured in the secret judgement of God he that sheweth his indignation by opprobrious words shall be held guiltie before all the assemblie of the heavenly Angels and Saints he that raileth and revileth shall bee judged worthie of hell fire that is of the greatest punishment Marlorat For they used foure kinds of punishments among the Jewes whereby they put malefactors to death strangling the sword stoning and fire of the which the last was the worst Beza 3. For he that raileth and revileth tres quasi uno ictu occidit killeth three as it were with one blow himselfe him that giveth credit and the third whom he slandereth and revileth Basting QUEST IX Whether beating and wounding though there be no killing be not forbidden here THe externall act followeth not only of killing but in offering any other violence with the hand in beating wounding striking and such like 1. Here commeth to be examined the opinion of R. Salomon that in this precept only murther is forbidden but other violent wrongs in maimes wounds shedding of bloud beatings and such like hee thinketh onely afterward to bee restrained in the Judicials 2. Against this opinion these reasons are enforced 1. The Judicials only concerned the Israelites and did not bind the Gentiles but even among them these kind of violent assaults were unlawfull therefore they are forbidden not by the Judicials only but by the Morall law Tostat. qu. 21. He also urgeth this reason The things which were forbidden by the Judicials of Moses only it was no sinne for the Israelites to doe before those Lawes were given them that is before they came to Mount Sinai but it was unlawful before for them one to smite another as for the same cause Moses reproved an Hebrew that did his brother wrong and smote him Exod. 2.13 therefore these wrongs were not only prohibited by the Judiciall law 3. Burgensis giveth this reason Quia facit contra charitatem Because he that smiteth or woundeth though he kill not doth against charity as he also doth which killeth though in an higher degree So also Lippoman 4. Tostatus further giveth this rule Omnia quae pertinent ad idem genus reducuntur ad idem prâ—ceptuum All that belongeth to the same kinde is to be referred to the same Commandement as all wounding beating smiting tendeth to the hurt of our brother in his body as killing likewise doth QUEST X. Why actuall murder is such an hainous sinne before God NOw followeth the greatest transgression among the rest which is the taking away of a mans life 1. For if hatred envy railing wounding and the like are counted murder before God in respect of the will and purpose much more murder it selfe which is the scope and end whereat all the former wrongs and injuries drive for if those things are displeasing unto God because they often bring forth murder the effect it selfe must needs bee more hainous Basting 2. Another reason which amplifieth the sinne of murder is because the Lord by this meanes seeth Imaginem suam violari that his image is violated which is given as a reason of this precept Gen. 9.6 Calvin 3. And againe it is an unnaturall sinne because man is as our owne flesh as the Prophet saith Isai. 58.7 Hide not thy selfe from thine owne flesh but no man ever hated his owne flesh as the Apostle saith Calvin Yea the murderer herein is crudelier Lupâ— more cruell than the Wolfe for as Aristotle writeth 4. Animalium Give unto a Wolfe the flesh of another Wolfe and he will not eat it yet one man preyeth upon another and devoureth another Thomas 4. Hominum societas violatur by this meanes the societie of man is violated which that it may be preserved the Lord forbiddeth all shedding of bloud Galas 5. Polluitur foedatur terra
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 by the law of Moses was not adjudged to
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 of gold and the Babylonish garment which God 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 â—he 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 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 cursing to the face of the parents is judged worthie
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 publike peace and safety is violated as in the Campe
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 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 〈◊〉 â—â—cuse of 〈◊〉 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 〈…〉 The Mathematicall it meaneth Magicall science damnable and it decreeth thus 〈…〉 sunt Soothsayers and Diviners are to be burned Nec â—rs ista disâ—i nec dâ—ceâ—t debet This art must neither be learned nor taught yea by the Civill law he which consulted with Soothsayers 〈…〉 shall be punished by the sword QUEST XXXIII Of the 〈◊〉 stone of 〈…〉 Vers. 19. WHosoever lieth with a beast 〈◊〉 Prâ—opins and the 〈…〉 doe understand this of a beastly and bruâ—â—sh man with whom it is dangerous to converse and by death they understand here eternall death But this were to 〈◊〉 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 〈◊〉 this one kind also comprehending all other outragious lusts 〈◊〉 against nature as 〈◊〉 18.22 and 20.15 〈◊〉 3. And there are two sinnes specially against nature either when non servitus 〈◊〉 speciâ—â— 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 debitâ—s sermo the due sex is not kept as when man with man worketh â—ilahinesse 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. 〈◊〉 latur talibus flâ—giriâ—â— societ 〈◊〉 illa qua cum Deo noâ—â—s esse debet c. By such hainouâ— sins that societie 〈◊〉 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 bruâ—â— 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 nâ—scitur 〈…〉 contrarâ—â—m 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 lâ—st any other by thâ—â— evill example should attempt to doe the like with that beast Lyran. QUEST XXXIV The reasons why mâ—n 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 simplicâ—ter 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 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 by experience what it was to use strangers hardly that by
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 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 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 inaâ—era 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 liberiâ—s 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 signifâ—ing 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
the old and new Lippom. panes azymi munditiam vita the unleavened bread betokeneth the holinesse of life without the leaven of maliciousnesse as S. Paul expoundeth 1 Cor. 6. 2. The solemne washing of Aaron and his sons did signifie the Sacrament of Baptisme and as they doe not put on their garments untill first the filth of the flesh be washed away Sic nisi in Christo novi homines renaseantur So unlesse they become new men in Christ they are not admitted unto holy things Hierom. They which come unto God must first bee purged and cleansed from their sins Pelarg. And hereby more specially was signified in this solemne washing with water the publike Baptisme of Christ which though he needed not in respect of himselfe yet thereby he would consecrate that Sacrament for us Osiander 3. By the putting on of the Priestly garments after they were washed is signified the putting on of Christ cum tunicas polliceas deposuerimus after we have put off our old vestures Hierom. So Procopius applieth those words of the Apostle Put on the Lord Iesus Christ So also Pelarg. 4. By the oyle wherewith Aaron was annointed Beda understandeth Gratiam Spiritus sancti The grace of the Spirit And Hierom here applieth that saying of the Prophet David Psal. 45. God even thy God hath annointed thee with the oyle of gladnesse above thy fellowes Therefore was Aaron onely annointed in the head and none of the rest because Christ received the Spirit beyond measure and the holy Ghost descended and lighted upon him when he was baptized Matth. 3. Osiander QUEST X. Why the Priests lay their hands upon the head of the beast Vers. 10. AAron and his sons shall put their hands upon the head c. 1. Augustine by this ceremonie understandeth the receiving of power Vt ipsi etiam aliquid consecrare possent that they also might consecrate afterward unto God So also Lyranus But because the people also did use to lay their hands upon their sacrifices which they brought Levit. 4. who received thereby no power to sacrifice this seemeth not to be the meaning 2. Iunius thus expoundeth it Quasi seipses sisterent sacrificarent Iehovae As though they did present themselves to bee sacrificed unto God yet not in their owne person but Christs But this cannot be the meaning for the former reason because the people did also lay on their hands who were therein no type of Christ that sacrificed himselfe for us 3. Some thinke that by this ceremonie in imposing of their hands they did resigne their right in that beast Tostat. Et destinarunt illud ut fieret sacrificium and ordained it to be a sacrifice Osiander 4. But there is more in it than so they hereby confesse that they were worthie to die in Gods justice for their sins Sed ex divina misericordia mors in animal transferebatur But by the divine mercie their death was transferred upon the beast Lyran. wherein Christ is lively shadowed forth who died for us Simler QUEST XI Of the divers kinds of sacrifices and why some kinde of beasts were taken for sacrifice and not other Vers. 11. SO thou shalt kill the calfe c. 1. There were three kinde of sacrifices which were usually offered the first was called holocaustum a burnt offering because it was wholly consumed upon the Altar and this kinde was offered specially ad reverentiam majestatis for reverence of the divine majestie to testifie our obedience and service The second was the sacrifice for sin whereof part was burned upon the Altar part was for the Priests use unlesse it were a sin offering for the Priest or the people in which cases all was consumed on the Altar The third sort were peace offerings which were offered in signe of thanksgiving for some benefit received or to be received whereof part was burnt upon the Altar part was for the Priest and the rest was for the offerer Thom. 2. Now although there were many cleane birds and beasts yet there were onely two kinde of the one the pigeon and turtle dove and three of the other bullocks sheepe and goats which were taken for sacrifice whereof Philo giveth this reason because both among the fowles and beasts these are of the meekest and mildest nature the pigeon and turtle dove and amongst the beasts these three sorts are tamest when we see that whole heards and flocks of them may be driven by a boy and they have neither pawes or clawes to hurt as ravenous beasts nor yet armed with teeth to devoure wanting the upper row wherein appeareth the harmlesse disposition of these creatures Philo addeth further that these beasts of all other are most serviceable unto mans use sheepe and goats for cloathing and food and bullocks beside the use of their flesh for meat and their skins for leather they serve with their labour in the tilling of the ground To these may a third reason bee added because the land of Canaan most abounded with these kinds of fowles and beasts they are prescribed for sacrifice And a fourth also may be this they were not to offer of wilde beasts because they could not easily bee had and hardly are they gotten alive for which cause they were not appointed to offer fishes which could not so easily be taken and very hardly alive but their sacrifices must be brought alive Riber 3. Now in the consecration of Aaron and his sons all these sacrifices are offered a bullocke for a sinne offering one ramme for a burnt offering and another for a peace offering QUEST XII Why the bloud was laid upon the horns of the Altar Vers. 12. THou shalt take of the bloud and put it upon the hornes c. 1. The bloud here was not used to confirme any league or covenant betweene God and his people as chap. 24. for in that case first the words and articles of the covenant were read before the bloud was sprinkled and beside each partie betweene whom the covenant was made were besprinkled not onely the Altar which represented God but the people also But here neither of these is performed there is no covenant rehearsed neither are the people sprinkled with the bloud 2. There was then another use beside this of the sprinkling of bloud which was to purge and cleanse and so to pacifie and appease as this reason is yeelded why they should not eat the bloud because the Lord had given it to be offered upon the Altar to be an atonement for their soules Levit. 17.11 And not onely the Altar of burnt offering was cleansed by bloud but the whole Tabernacle the high Priest in the day of reconciliation sprinkled the bloud upon the Mercie seat and before the Mercie seat the Altar and Tabernacle also to purge them from the sins and trespasses of the people Levit. 16.16 Therefore the Apostle saith Almost all things by the law are purged with bloud Heb. 9.22 The bloud of the sacrifices then was put upon
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 had conceived that Moses were dead they would not have spoken
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 not lawfull for a Christian to sweare upon the Turkes Alcaron or
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 â—x 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