2. It is the dutie of Pastors to admonish the Magistrates by the word of God arguendo eorum notoriam impietatem ad officium iuxta verbum Dei leges faciendum cohortando by reproouing their notorious impietie and by exhorting them to doe their dutie according to the word of God and the lawes this proposition which Pareus setteth downe may safely be receiued and assented vnto as agreeable to the word of God for so Elias reprooued Ahab to his face and Iohn Baptist Herod telling him of his incest with his brothers wife Thus excellently Ambrose writeth hereof to Theodosius who had caused some thousands of people to be put to the sword vniustly an pudet te imperator facere quod Propheta Dauid c. peccavi Domine c. noli ergo impatienter ferre imperator si tibi dicatur tu fecisti istud quod Davidi dictum est à Propheta c. art thou ashamed O Emperour to doe that which the Prophet Dauid did I haue sinned Lord doe not then take it impatiently O Emperour if it be said vnto thee as Nathan said to Dauid thou hast done this epist. 28. ad Theodos. 3. It is lawfull for the Pastors of the Church to refuse to communicate holy things vnto impious and cruell Magistrates which will not be admonished nor reclaimed from their sinnes as in such a case they are not to be admitted vnto the Sacraments neither is the Pastor bound to be a minister of holy things vnto them this is warranted by the Scripture Matth. 7.6 Giue not that which is holy vnto dogs neither cast ye your pearles before swine 1. Tim. 5.22 Lay hands suddenly on no man neither be partakers of other mens sinnes keepe thy selfe pure but he which admitteth any notorious sinner to the cōmunion is partaker of his sinnes Ambrose also to this effect saith to Theodosius offerre non audeo sacrificium si volueris assistere I dare not offer the spirituall sacrifice if thou be present epist. 28. he refused to communicate with the Emperour beeing guiltie of blood 5. Pareus goeth yet a steppe further that the Bishops and Pastors may resist vniust Magistrates not onely by admonishing reproouing and exhorting them but also contumaces de consensu Ecclesiae etiam Satanae tradendo donec rescipiscant in deliuering them vp also vnto Sathan with the consent of the Church such as are obstinate till they repent for this his assertion he alleadgeth these reasons S. Paul saith 1. Tim. 5.20 Them that sinne rebuke openly that the rest may feare 2. Because the Pastors watch ouer mens soules and must giue account for them if any perish by their default 3. Ambrose resisted Theodos. by the word But none of these reasons doe prooue that Princes are to be excommunicate but onely that they must be reprooued and shewed their faultes which yet must be done with reuerent respect not in such sort as they should by taunting speach or malepart reprehensions be disgraced before their subiects Ambrose as is shewed before onely withdrew his hand from ministring holy things to the Emperor beeing guiltie of innocent blood neither by his peremptorie sentence did he cast him out of the Church but perswaded him to repentance for his sinne and to forbeare Indeed the practise of the Romane Church is such to make no great matter of excommunicating Emperors and Kings and to absolue the subiects from their obedience wherein the Pope euidently transgresseth in these three points in exercising iurisdiction where he hath nothing to doe and in arrogating to himselfe the sole authoritie of dispensing the keyes of the Church and in denying ordinarie duties and obedience to an excommunicate Prince And as touching the excommunicating of Magistrates by the censure of the Church I take it not to be so conuenient to be done neither haue we any direct precept or president in the Scripture to warrant it But the contrarie rather 1. If the ecclesiasticall sword might be drawen forth against the Magistrates then the Ciuill also and the Prince might as well be proceeded against in Ciuill courts to be sentenced for his offence as in ecclesiasticall for otherwise there should be lesse power in the Ciuile then in the Ecclesiasticall state but this were a verie proposterous course to appoint superior iudges to the Prince in his owne kingdome 2. Dauid when he had committed these two great sinnes of murther and adulterie confessed and said tibi soli peccavi against thee onely haue I sinned the reason whereof Ambrose yeelded quia rex erat nullis ipse legibus tenebatur because he was a King and was bound to no lawes apolog Dauid c. 10. and Hierome also saith rex enim erat alium non timebat he was a King and feared no other ad Eustoch It seemeth then that Dauid was free both from Ciuil and Ecclesiasticall censure whereupon Ambrose inferreth generally of all Kings neque enim vllis ad paenam vocantur legibus toti imperij potestate that they cannot be drawen to punishment by any humane lawes beeing priuiledged by their imperiall powers 3. Saint Paul willeth prayers to be made for Kings 1. Tim. 2.2 we must blesse them not curse them but to giue them ouer to Sathan is to curse them Saint Paul when he had called Ananias painted wall being admonished that he was the high Priest excused himselfe by his ignorance alleadging that text Exod. 22.28 Thou shalt not speake euill of the ruler of thy people so farre off was Saint Paul from excommunicating him and giuing him ouer vnto Sathan as he did Elymas the Sorcerer whom he called the child of the Deuill Act. 13.10 I hold it then the safer way that the sentence of excommunication goe not forth vpon any occasion against the supreame Magistrate howsoeuer the inferiour may be censured it is sufficient that the Minister discharge his dutie in reproouing and exhorting and in not consenting to any sinne in the Magistrate as Ambrose said to the Emperor malo mihi honorum esse tecum quam malorum consortium I had rather be partaker with thee in good things then in euill c. He speaketh of his silence and connivence in the Emperors sinne as the words following shew ideo clementia tuae displicere debet sacerdotis silentium therefore the silence of the Priest or Pastor ought to dislike your clemencie 4. But because the Papall sea taketh vpon it to excommunicate Kings wherein I would haue a perpetuall difference betweene their synagogue and the reformed Churches this shall be our last proposition here of this matter that an excommunicate Prince is notwithstanding to be obeyed by his subiects neither is it lawfull for them by that colour to withdrawe their obedience 1. The diuine ordinance is to be obeyed in all lawfull things but all higher powers are Gods ordinance euen when they stand excommunicate they cease not not to be Magistrates for seeing they are ordained of God by no humane constitution can they
Prince maketh some of his subiects to whom he committeth his authoritie iudges of the rest 5. Obiect Tolet annot 11. thus reasoneth from the authoritie which the spirituall power hath ouer mens persons and bodies to free and exempt them as it shall make most for their soules health toward the obtaining of euerlasting life 1. Like as a king hath power to take mens sonnes and daughters for his seruice and their vineyards and possessions to giue them to his seruants as Samuel describeth the office of a king 1. Sam. 8. so much more hath the spirituall power authoritie to doe it toward the aduancement of Gods kingdome 2. our Sauiour Matth. 17.26 freeth the sonnes of kings that is omnes credentes all that beleeue from paying of tribute which notwithstanding was paid propter vitandum scandalum to avoide scandall 3. S. Paul had power to retaine and keepe Onesimus from his master Philemons seruice yet he did remit somewhat of his power that his Master might not seeme to doe it of necessitie but willingly Philem. 1.4 Contra. 1. Popes are partiall iudges in their owne case and therefore it skilleth not what immunities they haue giuen to the Clergie and no man can conferre more power vpon an other then he hath himselfe seeing then that the Pope himselfe is not exempted from the power of the Magistrate he much lesse can exempt others 2. Samuel in that place describeth not the office of a King what it ought to be but what Princes should doe for their will and pleasure and so the Pope herein taketh vpon him to tyrannize in the Church 3. that place is vnderstood of the naturall sonnes of Kings who are free from tribute and so Christ beeing lineally descended of Dauid might haue challenged that priuiledge thus beside our owne interpreters Pererius one of Tolets owne order expoundeth that place de naturalibus filijs of the naturall sonnes of Kings disput 2. num 12. for otherwise a great inconveniencie would followe that all Christians should be exempted and treed from paying of tribute 4. S. Paul had a speciall interest in Philemon to command him because as Theophylact well interpreteth te in Christo genui I haue begotten thee in Christ this was his speciall case this can not then be drawne to an ordinarie present and example and againe this maketh directly against the Papists that if S. Paul which had this Apostolike authoritie would not keepe Onesimus from his master without his consent it is great boldnes and presumption for the Pope who begetteth none vnto the faith by preaching as S. Paul did and so hath no such interest in that behalfe neither is he an Apostle to arrogate that to himselfe which S. Paul would not vsurpe Now notwithstanding these obiections that Ecclesiasticall persons and causes though in things meerely Ecclesiasticall and proper to the ministerie as are the preaching of the word and the administration of the Sacraments they are to be ruled onely by the word and are not subiect to men yet are in respect of their ciuill obedience as they are citizens and parts of the Commonwealth and in some sort as ministers also subiect to the censure and command of the ciuill Magistrate some of our arguments are these 1. The Kings of Iudah exercised power ouer Ecclesiasticall persons both in ciuill and criminall causes and partly also Ecclesiasticall as Dauid appointed vnto the Levites their courses Salomon displaced Abiathar from the Priesthood Bellarmine answereth that these Kings were also Prophets and so God did extraordinarily commit vnto them some things which belonged onely vnto the Priests lib. 1. de concil c. 20. Contra. Not onely Dauid and Salomon which were Prophets did exercise this power ouer Ecclesiasticall persons and causes but the rest also of the succeeding godly kings of Iudah as Iehosaphat gaue commission to the Priests and Iudges to abolish idolatrie Ioas reprooued the negligence of the Priests Iosias purged the land of idols and put downe the Chemarims and vnlawfull order of Priests 2. The Apostles words are generall Let euery soule be subiect to the higher power therefore Ecclesiasticall persons also Ans. 1. Origen by euery soule vnderstandeth animalis homo a naturall man spirituall men then are exempted Contra. 1. In the Hebrew phrase euery soule is taken for euery person therefore that distinction betweene the spirit and the soule proceedeth from the ignorance of the Hebrew phrase 2. Origen in that place saith that he which hath no siluer or gold or possessions hath nothing to be subiect for but the Papall Clergie haue all these and in great abundance therefore euen by Origens sentence for such things they ought to be subiect vnto the Ciuill powers 2. Ans. Bellarmine telleth vs that the Apostle speaketh generally of obedience to be giuen as well to spirituall as temporall powers and that the meaning is that euery subiect should yeeld obedience to his superiour and so the Clergie should giue obedience to the Pope and the Laitie to their Prince lib. 2. de Rom. Pontif. c. 29. resp ad argum 3. Contr. 1. The Apostle speaketh here of that power which hath the sword but the Ecclesiasticall state doth not handle the sword therefore the Apostle speaketh onely of subiection to the Ciuill power to whom the sword is committed 2. and this were to make a diuision and rent in kingdomes if all that are therein should not be subiects to the king of the countrey as in France all the French should not be in subiection to the French king but the Clergie of France should be subiects to the Pope Martyr 3. Ans. The Papall Clergie are bound by oath vnto their Bishops and they to the Pope and therefore without breach to their oath they can not be subiect to temporall gouernors Contr. Such oaths are contrarie to the Apostles precept of obedience to be giuen to the Ciuil magistrate and therfore pro impijs illicitis rescindi debent they must be cut off and disanulled as vnlawfull and impious Gualter 3. Argum. Our blessed Sauiour was himselfe subiect not onely priuately vnto his parents but publikely to the Magistrate to whome he caused poll money to be paid for himselfe and Peter refusing to vse that priuiledge which he might haue challenged to himselfe as beeing descended lineally of king Dauid wherein he was an example vnto vs of obedience to be yeelded vnto Ciuill gouernors So also S. Paul following his masters steps was obedient to the magistrate and appealed vnto Cesar Act. 16. 4. Argum. This was the doctrine of the Church in the pure ages as Chrysostome vpon this place saith Euery soule should be subiect si Apostolus si Evangelista si Propheta sive quisquis tandem fueris if thou art an Apostle or Euangelist or whatsoeuer els Bernard epist 42. thus inferreth vpon this place si omnis anima vestra quis vos excipit ab vniversitate si quis tentat excipere conatur deripere if euery soule then yours who can except you
9. distinct 31. c. 11. Catetanus and Catharinus in 4. cap. ad Philippens and Erasmus likewise their grounds are out of two places 1. Cor. 9.5 Haue we not power to lead about a wife beeing a sister as well as the rest of the Apostles and Philipp 4.3 I beseech thee faithfull yoakefellow helpe those weomen which laboured with me in the Gospel But neither of these places prooue any such thing The first we refuse not neither vpon Tertullians reason because it goeth before Haue we not power to eate and drinke that he speaketh of such women which ministred vnto them victuals or Hieromes who thinketh because the name sisters is added he vnderstandeth rather other women then their proper wiues as the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth both a wife and a woman for their wiues also were their sisters in profession or Augustines who saith the Apostle non ducendi sed circumducendi â—ocabulo vsus est vsed not the word of leading to marrie but leading about But the speciall reason why we refuse this place is because at the same time that S. Paul wrote this epistle he counted himselfe among those which were vnmarried 1. Cor. 7.8 This place onely sheweth that S. Paul had power to carrie about a wife as the rest of the Apostles did but not that he vsed this power as likewise he had libertie not to worke as it followeth in the same place v. 6. Or I onely and Barnabas haue we not power not to worke yet he wrought with his hands notwithstanding The other place is rather to be vnderstood of some helper that was most neerely ioyned vnto S. Paul in the worke of the Gospel then of his wife for as Caietane well noteth seeing S. Paul was vnmaried before when he was at libertie and wrote the first epistle to the Corinthians it is not like he tooke him a wife afterward beeing now a prisoner at Rome when he sent this epistle to the Philippians and beside the Syrian translatour putteth it out of doubt who vseth here the masculine gender as Beza noteth which is ambiguous in the Greeke 3. Some other leaue the matter in suspense not determining whether S. Paul were married or not as Origen in the beginning of his commentarie vpon this epistle to which opinion it is safest to subscribe to hold it as a matter indifferent whether S. Paul were at any time married or not seeing it is not expressed in Scripture It sufficeth that he saith he had power to lead about a sister a wife as well as the rest But now Pererius out of some fathers as Hierome Augustine contendeth that it must rather be interpreted a woman beeing a sister for the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here vsed signifieth both a woman and a wife which conceit is remooued by these sufficient reasons 1. They in thus reading a woman a sister doe inuert the order of the words which stand thus in the originall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a sister a wife if they will haue it a sister a woman that were superfluous seeing the word sister also includeth the other for shee could not be a sister but shee must be a woman too 2. It was more seemely that seeing the Apostles had women in their companie to minister vnto them it was more fit and conuenient that their owne wiues should goe about with them then other women which had not beene without offence 3. Likewise the very phrase of leading about a sister sheweth some authoritie and command such as husbands haue ouer their wiues and masters ouer their seruants as Peter Martyr well noteâ—h the Apostles had power to lead about their owne wiues who were not to forsake their husbands but ouer other women they had not that power 4. And if this were to be vnderstood of rich and wealthie women which accompanied the Apostles and ministred vnto them of their substance they had beene no charge vnto the Churches whether the Apostles came and so this had beene no priuiledge to the Apostles to bring such women with them as should support their charges But the Apostle here standeth vpon his priuiledge and immunitie if he had thought good to haue vsed it that he might as the other Apostles haue lead about a wife Beza So that whether S. Paul were married or not it sufficeth that he might haue taken a wife if he would Morall observations out of the whole Epistle 1. Observ. Of the singular profit that may arise by reading of this Epistle to the Romanes This Epistle hath a double vse either to instruct vs in the right iudgement of the greatest mysteries of Christian Religion as of iustification by faith of the Law of Election of certentie of saluation as also to stirre vs vp to the workes of pietie Origen onely commendeth the reading of the latter part of the Epistle from c. 12. to the ende the other part he thinketh not to be so necessarie as handling onely questions about the ceremonies of the Law but herein I preferre rather the iudgement of Chrysostome who often caused S. Pauls epistles to be read in his hearing euen twice euery weeke argument in epist. ad Roman and Augustine professeth he was much addicted to the reading of S. Paul lib. 7. confess c. 3. It was an auncient vse in times past in the Church that they which were appointed to the Ministerie should get without booke the Psalmes and the prophesie of Isai in the old Testament and the Gospel of S. Matthew with S. Pauls epistle in the new It shall be profitable for euery Christian likewise to follow the same godly vse especially to acquaint themselues with the diuine writings of S. Paul and euery one may say with Chrysostome gaudeo equidem quod spirituali illa tuba frui datum sit I am glad that I may enioy that spirituall trumpet c. in argum ad Roman The first Chapter 1. The text with the diuers readings PAul a seruant of Iesus Christ called to be an Apostle put a part to preach the Gospel of Christ 2 Which he had afore promised by his Prophets in the holy Scriptures 3 Of his Sonne Iesus Christ our Lord. G. made not begotten V.T. or made to him L. of the seede of Dauid according to the flesh not of the seede of Dauid in the flesh T. 4 Declared to be the Sonne of God not knowne T. or predestinate L. or destinate to be the Sonne of God V. in power L. not mightily G. Be. or by power V. according to the spirit of sanctification G. Be. V. not according to the holy spirit T. or the spirit that sanctifieth R. by the resurrection from the dead T. B.G.Be not of the dead euen Iesus Christ our Lord Be. T. not of Iesus Christ our Lord. L.V.R.B. for it must be suferred to the beginning of the third verse and all that followeth must be enclosed in a parenthesis so the Genevens doe transpose it but it is safest to put it in
experience he may see his owne folly Theodoret also to the same purpose vseth this similitude that God leaueth men to themselues tanquam cymbam absque rectore as aship left without a pilote Theophylact likeneth God herein to a Phisitian who hauing to deale with an vnruly patient that will not obey his precepts taketh no more care of him likewise Ambrose thus expoundeth tradere est permittere non incitare to deliuer vp is to permit not to iâ—â—ite or stirre vp Damascen lib. 4. de fide orthodox c. 20. sheweth that it is the vse of Scripture to call the permission of God his action that he is said to doe that which he onely permitteth and suffereth yea Pererius here addeth further that the permission of God sometime nomine praecepti appellatur is called by the name of precept as whereas Christ saith according to Matthew c. 19.8 Moses suffered you for the hardnesse of your heart to put away your wiues according to S. Marke c. 10.3 he saith What did Moses command you Setus in his commentarie maketh two kindes of permission est vna generalis there is one generall when any man is suffered to sinne but this permission is not called a deliuering vp altera est singularis quaedam valde formidabilis there is an other a singular and most fearefull kinde of permission when God for the punishment of former sinnes suffereth one to be blinded and hardened in his sinne which kinde of permission the Apostle speaketh of here Of this opinion generally are the Romanists that this deliuering vp is vnderstood of permission as Lyranus with the ordinarie gloss Varablus Tolet. the Rhemists Contra. 1. To make God onely a sufferer or permitter of things to be done doth admit a double inconuenience first they make God an idle beholder of mens actions like as Homer bringeth in Iuppiter feasting and spotting himselfe in Aethiopia while the Grecians did take Troy and againe they make God accessarie and consenting vnto euill for like as the father or master of the house if he should suffer his seruants to liue riotously and giue themselues to all licentiousnesse though he doe not encourage them to it yet in not hindering them he seemeth to giue consent the like inconuenience also would follow if God should be a permitter or sufferer onely of such things to be done Pareus 2. But it will be here obiected that if God suffer not sinne to be done in the world it could not be how then is not he accessarie to that which he doth not hinder Answ. God is here otherwise to be considered then as man we can not suffer any euill to be done before vs which is in our power to hinder but we must be guiltie of it But the Lord is alwaies most iust euill should not be done in the world if it did not stand with Gods will and pleasure who notwithstanding is therein iust and good as Augustine saith probando patientiam dat locum poenitentiae nolens aliquem perire c. the Lord therein sheweth his patience in giuing way vnto repentance because he would not haue any perish c. and so he concludeth Deus non facit voluntates malas sed vtitur ijs vt voluerit cum aliquid iniquè velle non possit though God make not mens wills euill yet he vseth them as it pleaseth him and yet he willeth not any thing vniustly August contr Iulian lib. 5. c. 3. 3. Chrysostomes similitudes are not fit for the captaine which leaueth his armie is a betraier of them and the very cause of their deliuering vp but so is not God the author of euill and the father can not turne his sonne from his licentious life but God is able to turne the heart Martyr 4. Seeing the Scripture ascribeth vnto God manifest action as shall appeare afterward as he is said to haue hardened Pharaohs heart and to bid Shemei curse Dauid and such like it is a forcing of Scripture to applie that vnto a bare permission which sheweth an actiue and working power Pareus 2. An other way how God is saide to deliuer them vp is by the subtraction and withdrawing of his grace as he which taketh away the proppe or pillar that beareth vp a great stone or weight may be said to be the cause of the fall thereof Thomas Thus Gregorie expoundeth God is said to harden the heart quando cor reprobum per gratiam non emollit when he doth not mollifie with his grace a reprobate heart So also Augustine Deus non indurat cor impertiendo malitiam sed non largiendo gratiam c. God doth not harden the heart by imparting vnto it malice but in not giuing vnto it grace So also Thomas vpon this place God directly doth not deliuer ouer men to vncleannes by inclining the affections sed indirectè tradit in peccatum in quantum subtrahit gratiam but he doth indirectly deliuer them to sinne by withdrawing his grace This interpretation may safely be admitted but yet it seemeth not fully to expresse the meaning of the Apostles phrase for deliuering vp signifieth more then a subtraction onely or depriuing one of grace 3. Some doe expound the Apostle thus that God is said to harden the heart and to deliuer vp vnto coâ—câ—piscence and such like by ministring occasion which is peruerted by the wicked vnto euill for as vnto those that loue God all things are turned to the best so vnto those that hate God all things make for their ruine and destruction thus the miracles and wonders wrought in Egypt and the messages which Moses brought from God vnto Pharaoh were a meanes to harden Pharaohs heart not so intended by God but so peruerted by Pharaohs malice Thus God is saide to doe those things because by occasion of such things as the Lord doth other things fall out In this sense it is said that he which loueth iniquitie hateth his owne soule not that he intendeth directly the death of his soule but because he doth such things as procure the death of his soule So the Lord bestowed many benefits and temporall blessings vpon the heathen which they abused to couetousnes and wantonnes in following of their owne lusts This interpretation followeth Pet. Martyr and Pererius But this seemeth to be no fit exposition God deliuered them vp that is they abusing the blessings of God vnto wantonnes deliuered themselues vp for the Apostle here sheweth that this deliuering of them vp was inflicted as a punishment vpon the Gentiles for their idolatrie and therefore God must be considered here as a iust Iudge who had an hand in this their punishment otherwise then by ministring occasion onely 4. Some doe thus interpret tradidit illos Deus id est delictum in Dominum God deliuered them vp that is their sinne committed against God deliuered them as we say perdidit illum pecunia his money was his destruction whereas it was not the money but the abuse of the money which hurt him so
hath receiued saith if he liue we should call him iust if he liue euill c. lib. 83. quest quest 76. Controv. 21. How S. Paul and S. Iames are reconciled together Whereas S. Paul here saith v. 28. We conclude that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the lawe but S. Iames affirmeth c. 2.24 You see then how that of workes a man is iustified and not of faith onely c. they may seeme at the first sight to be contrarie they are then thus reconciled 1. Not as Erasmus and Caietanus who doubt of the authoritie of the epistle of S. Iames for though it were a while doubted of yet was it at length receiued by a generall consent of the Church to be of Apostolik authoritie as it is acknowledged to be by Origen hom iâ— Ios. Cyprian in symbol Epiphan haeres 76. Augustine lib. 2. de doctrin Christ. c. 8. Daâ—â—as lib. 4. c. 8. and others 2. Not yet is the solution of the Romanists false and friuolous that S. Paul speaketh of workes going before iustification which are without faith and grace and S. Iames of the workes of grace which followe the first iustification for S. Paul euen excludeth the workes of Abraham which were workes of grace Rom. 4.2 3. The best solution then is this that the Apostles neither speake of the same kind of faith not yet of the same manner of iustifiying 1. S. Paul speaketh of the true liuely faith which iustifieth before God but S. Iames derogateth not from the true faith but from the faith which was in shewe onely which he calleth a dead faith and consequently no faith and such a faith as deuils may haue S. Paul then saying that a liuely faith iustifieth before God and S. Iames that a dead faith iustifieth not no not before men much lesse before God are not contrarie the one to the other 2. Neither doe the Apostles take the word iustifying in the same sense S. Paul speaketh of iustification before God but S. Iames of the declaration and shewing forth of our iustification by our workes before men as is euident thus the Apostle saith euidently v. 18. shewe thou me thy faith out of thy workes c. Againe he saith that Abraham was iustified by workes when he offred his sonne Izaak which must be vnderstood that his iustification was thereby testified manifested and declared for by faith before God he had beene iustified before as the Apostle alleadgeth in the same place v. 23. Abraham beleeued God and it was imputed to him for righteousnesse which testimonie is giuen of Abrahams faith before he offred vp his sonne So then S. Paul saying workes doe not iustifie before God and S. Iames that workes doe iustifie before men that is declare and testifie their iustification do not contradict the one the other 22. Controv. Against Socinus that Christ properly redeemed vs by paying the ransome for vs and not metaphorically 1. Argum. Impious Socinus as Pareus rehearseth his wicked opinion and confuseth it denieth that Christ died for vs or paied any ransome at all for our redemption but he is said to redeeme that is to deliuer vs without paying any price at all as Exod. 15.13 and in other places the Lord is saide to haue redeemed that is deliuered his people from the Egyptian seruitude Ans. 1. It followeth not because to redeeme is sometime taken in that sense that it should be so euery where 2. there is great difference betweene corporall and spirituall deliuerance the first was and might be done onely by the power of God without paying any price at all the other could not be compassed without paying of a price both because of Gods iustice that they which sinne should die Rom. 1.32 and the truth of his word because he had said to man that if he sinned he should die the death 2. Argum. Psal. 31.5 Dauid speaking of Christ saith Thou hast redeemed me O Lord God of truth here Christ is saide to haue beene redeemed but he was not redeemed with the paying of any price Ergo neither did he redeeme vs in that manner Ans. 1. If this Psalme be vnderstood of Christ we confesse that to redeeme is taken improperly in that sense but then it followeth not because it is vsed improperly in one place therefore it should be so in all 2. But if the Psalme be vnderstood of Dauid who was the type of Christ the word is taken properly for euen Dauid was no otherwise freed from his sinne then by the price of Christs death 3. Argum. The deliuerance of the Israelites by Moses from the bondage of Egypt was a type and figure of our spirituall deliuerance by Christ but that was done onely by the power of God without any price payed therefore so was the other Answ. 1. The argument followeth not for the figure and the thing figured agree not in all things there is more in the substance then in the type 2. There is great difference betweene Moses Christs deliuerance Moses was a meere man and a seruant of the house Christ was God and man the Lord of all Moses deliuered onely from corporall bondage and seruitude Christ from spirituall bondage vnder sinne from the wrath and curse of God Moses redeemed the Israelites without his own death or shedding of his blood but Christ our redeemer gaue his life and shed his blood for vs Moses gaue them the inheritance of the earthly Canaan Christ hath purchased for vs an euerlasting inheritance 4. Argum. Redemption is properly said to be from him of whom the captiues are holden but we are said to be redeemed either from our iniquities Tit. 2.14 or from our vaine conuersation 1. Pet. 1.18 or from the curse of the lawe Galat. 3.13 of the which we were not held captiue but no where are we said to be redeemed from God or from his iustice c. Answ. 1. Touching the proposition or first part of the argument 1. it is false that redeÌ„ption is onely from him that keepeth vs in bondage for although principally captiues are freed from him whose captiues they are yet they are deliuered also from their verie bands imprisonment and other such like instruments of their captiuitie such are our sinnes as the bands and fetters that kept vs in thraldome vnder the deuill 2. there is a difference betweene corporall and spirituall bondage for there the price is paid to the enemie as to the great Turke to get the captiues out of his hand but here the price is paied to God not to deliuer vs from him but to reconcile vs vnto him like as when a subiect rebelling against his Prince is imprisoned and condemned to die till some mediation and satisfaction be made for him then his sinne is pardoned and he is reconciled to his prince 4. Concerning the second part of the reason 1. it is false that we were not detained captiues by our sinnes for they are as the snare of the deuil 2. Tim. 2.26 2.
c. a deuout mind is not by any precepts so much framed to the obedience of God as by a serious meditation of his mercie as the Apostle saith Tit. 2.11 The grace of God c. teacheth vs to denie vngodlines 2. Doctr. Of the threefold will of God v. 2. What is the good will of God acceptable and perfect Paulus Burgens addit 2 hath this distinction of the will of God which is taken here for voluntas signi his signified or reuealed will that is the will of God for the thing willed which is prohibitionis praecepti consilij in forbidding commanding or counselling as if a man abstaine from euill which is forbidden therein he doth well but if he doe also the thing commanded now he doth also that which is pleasing vnto God if further he proceed vnto the counsels then he is perfect as our Sauiour said Matth. 19.21 to the young man If thou wilt be perfect goe and sell all thou hast c. This distinction may be admitted with this caution if counsels be vnderstood of things indifferent as for a man wholly to leaue the world and to giue all or halfe to the poore as Zacheus did and such like not to merit thereby but to shew our obedience and thankfulnes to God in such there must be needs acknowledged a greater degree of perfection 3. Doctr. Against curious questionists v. 3. The Apostle forbiddeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to vnderstand aboue or beyond that which is meet to be vnderstood which may be vrged against curious and vnnecessarie questions of matters concerning religion such it seemeth the Church was much troubled with in S. Pauls time in so much that in sixe seuerall places in his two Epistles to Timothie he giueth him charge touching such contentious questions and vaine disputations 1. Ep. 1.4 c. 4.7 c. 6.5.20 2. Ep. 1.16.23 where he styleth such needlesse questions with the tearme of old wiues fables vaine disputations prophane bablings foolish and vnlearned questions Much like was that curious and needlesse endeauour of the schoole-Diuines in reducing all Diuinitie to intricate questions and idle and vaine speculations wherein I condemne not their commendable paines in the debating of doubtfull points fit to be discussed but in finding out new tricks and deuises and excogitating distinctions to obscure and corrupt the truth 4. Doctr. That no man must forsake his Ecclesiasticall function nor aspire aboue his reach Pet. Martyr applieth the former text against those which in times past did refuse or forsake the Ecclesiasticall functions to the which they were called who vnder pretense that they had not gifts sufficient but indeede either for feare of the troubles incident to those places or for loue of their own ease or pleasure did draw their necks out of the collar these he saith non sapere vt oportet they did not vnderstand as they ought But in these daies there is an other extreame which is admitted when men doe presume ambitiously vnto places aboue their reach and for the which they are in respect of gifts vnmeete neither doe these sapere vt oportet they are not wise vnto sobtietie neither doe keepe themselues within their line and compasse 5. Doctr. That the holy Ghost is God v. 3. As God hath dealt to euery man c. That which here is ascribed vnto God is elsewhere said to be the worke of the spirit 1. Cor. 12.11 All these things worketh the selfe same spirit distributing to euery one as he will seeing then it is God that distributeth these seuerall gifts and graces and it is the Spirit that so distributeth them it doth necessarily follow that the Spirit is God 6. Doctr. The Scriptures are the rule of faith from the which we must not swarue v. 6. Prophesie according to the analogie or proportion of faith c. This proportion or rule of faith is to be taken onely from the Scriptures as our Sauiour biddeth vs search the Scriptures Ioh. 5.39 to them as the line of truth must we haue recourse in all our teaching and preaching not one iot to decline the same as the Prophet Isai saith c. 8.20 to the law to the testimonie if they speake not according to this word there is no truth in them so Hierome saith quod non discendit de monte Scripturarum eadem facilitate contemnitur qua approbatur that which floweth not downe from the mountaine of the Scriptures is as easilie refused as approoued c. in c. 23. Matth. Doct. 7. That Christian religion expelleth not humane affections but onely directeth them v. 9. Hate that which is euill c. A Christian may retaine hatred but it must be exercised against that which is euill it is not then as the Stoicks were of opinion that in a wise man there are no passions or affections there are without question but tempered and qualified by grace that like as in an harpe when time and tune is applyed to the instrument consisting of wood or some such like thing and strings there is made pleasant harmonie so humane affections ruled by grace doe make a sweete consent Doct. 8. Of the order and degrees in the Church and commonwealth v. 10. In giuing honour goe one before another Among Christians then there are which must giue honour and some are to be honoured Christ will haue order kept in his Church God is not the author of confusion 1. Cor. 14.33 the inferiours must yeeld honour to the superiours the scholars to the teachers the people to their pastor they which are ruled to their governours this maketh against the Anabaptisticall confusion which taketh away the ciuill superioritie of one aboue another Doct. 9. That the Church of God shall neuer want enemies to persecute it v. 14. Blesse them which persecute you c. Then the godly shall neuer want persecutors to exercise their patience there are two things which the world hateth vnitie and pietie and all persecutions in the world are either for the truth or godlinesse sake wherefore seeing such is the lot of the Church of God in this world they must arme themselues with patience as the Apostle saith Heb. 10.36 You had neede of patience that after you haue done the will of God yee might receiue the promise Doct. 10. How and wherein we should loue our enemies v. 19. Auenge not your selues c. We must thus be affected toward our enemies 1. in louing them as Christ loued vs when yet we were enemies Rom. 5.10 2. in procuring their conversion as Ananias did Sauls Act. 9. 3. in praying for them as Stephen did for the Iewes 4. in taking heede of giuing them offence for which cause Iacob went away from Esau Gen. 27. 5. in bearing their wrongs as the Apostles did Act. 5. 6. in molifying them with gentle words as Abigail did Dauid 1. Sam. 25. 7. in ministring necessarie things vnto them as Elisha did to the armie of the Syrians 1. King 6. 8. in shewing compassion in their miseries as Dauid
mourned for Saul 9. in receiuing them to mercie when they returne to grace as Ioseph did his brethren 5. Places of controversie Controv. 1. Concerning the power of free-will 1. Wherea◠〈◊〉 Apostle in this 12. chapter beginneth to giue precepts of righteousnes and to exhort 〈◊〉 holinesse hence the enemies to the garce of God take occasion to establish their opinion concerning free-will that a man assisted by Gods grace is able to performe all these precepts Stapletons reasons are these Antid p. 777. 1. The precepts of the morall lawe are agreeable to the lawe of nature and to the lawe of nations therefore they haue not such difficultie but that they may be kept 2. All things are possible to the grace of God which grace of God is had and obtained by prayer 3. God commandeth in vaine if his precepts cannot be performed so also Erasmus praecepta frigent si nihil tribuitur voluntari the precepts are cold if nothng be yeelded to the will of man c. 4. Either God is vniust in commanding that which cannot be performed or imprudent in requiring such obedience which he thought might be performed and cannot 5. And men herein haue an excuse of their disobedience because it is not in their power to doe that which they are bidden Contra. 1. The perfect obedience which the lawe requireth farre exceedeth that righteousnesse which the Lawe of nature and of nations exacteth for that onely requireth an externall discipline but the morall lawe prescribeth a perfect conformitie of the creature with the Creator 2. To the grace of God giuen in perfection nothing is hard and impossible but so is it not giuen to any in this life but in a certaine measure and degree the regenerate by grace are made able in some measure to keepe Gods commandements but not perfectly 3. Neither are the precepts of God in vaine though men are vnable to keepe them for there are diuerse other ends as the vnregenerate are either thereby stirred vp and called or are made inexcusable the regenerate by such precepts are raised vp from negligence and slouthfulnesse haue a rule giuen them to followe and doe see their owne weakenesse and are encouraged and prouoked to goe on still vnto perfection to attaine as neere it as they can 4. God is neither vniust in so commanding for the creature is bound to yeeld perfect obedience to the Creator and the creature both once had receiued strength in the creation which through wilfull transgression was lost and now a way is shewed by restauration in Christ how the will of God may be fulfilled neither is God imprudent for he is not deceiued in those ends which he propoundeth to himselfe in giuing such precepts vnto men 5. Man can haue no excuse for his disobedience seeing once he had receiued strength to performe the Creators will which was lost by mans willing transgression and because he seeketh not to haue his disobedience satisfied by the perfect obedience of Christ and so he contemneth grace offered 2. Now touching the doctrine of truth concerning freewill this we affirme that man by nature hath no power or actiuitie at all vnto that which is good but is altogether a seruant to sinne and that without grace in Christ no man can choose and followe that which is good this is euident by these texts of Scripture Genes 6.5 all the imaginations of the thoughts of mans heart are onely euill continually if all are euill and onely and continually what place or time is left here to that which is good in mans corrupt heart Math. 7.18 a corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit it is against the nature of things for euill to bring forth good or good euill euerie thing bringeth forth by nature that which is like vnto it Rom. 6.20 Ye were seruants of sinne Eph. 2.5 we were dead by our sinnes seruants are not freemen neither can the dead doe any worke of the liuing no more can a man by nature doe any thing that is good 1. Cor. 2.14 the naturall man perceiueth not the things of the spirit of God if he perceiue not nor knowe them he cannot choose to doe them for there is nothing in the election of the will which is not first in the conception of the vnderstanding But it will be obiected 1. Then is not the will of man free if it haue not power indifferently to good or euill Answ. The will of man is free from coaction and compulsion but not from necessitie for the determination of the will to one thing taketh not away the libertie and freedome thereof for the will of God by the perfection of nature is enclined onely to that which is good in the Angels by the perfection of grace and to euill the will is onely inclined by the peruersnesse of the will either simply and vnchangeably as in reprobate Angels and men or for a time and in some sort though not simply as in the vnregenerate yet in all these the will worketh freely without any forcing 2. Obiect Though a man without grace can doe no good thing yet his will assisted by grace is enabled to euerie good thing Answ. 1. That good thing which is wrought in the regenerate by the grace of Christ proceedeth not at all from their owne freewill grace worketh the will is wrought vpon for Christ saith without me ye can doe nothing Ioh. 15.5 2. this grace worketh not perfitly in any in this life but is begun onely here for the Apostle saith if we say we haue no sinne we deceiue our selues and the truth is not in vs 1. Ioh. 1.8 See further hereof Synops. Centur 4. err 42. to err 45. Controv. 2. Whether the Masse be a sacrifice properly so called The Romanists would prooue it out of this place v. 1. because the Apostle exhorteth to giue vp our bodies a liuing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sacrifice 1. hence they reason thus Christians haue a sacrifice properly so called which is the oblation of some externall and sensible thing vnto God by the lawfull Minister but there is no such externall sacrifice to be found among Christian saving the Masse it remaineth then that the Masse is that externall sacrifice 2. Euerie Priest must haue a sacrifice to offer but there is no other sacrifice offered vp by the Priests of the newe testament but the Masse Ergo to this purpose Bellarm. lib. 1. de Miss cap. 2. 15. Contra. 1. Christians neede not any externall sacrifice to offer vnto God such as were the legall sacrifices of beasts but they haue a true sacrifice though not to offer vp daily themselues which was once killed and sacrificed vpon the crosse which now is not daily to be offered vp but the memorie of that sacrifice is to be reuiued by the celebration of the Sacrament as our Sauiour saith this doe in remembrance of me And beside this sacrifice once offered for all there are other sacrifices not properly so called but
God is not the author of confusion but of the Magistrate by whom the murther should be punished Martyr 3. Tolet here hath a very good distinction betweene potestas vsus potestatis assumptio in potestatem the power the vse of the power and the assuming of the power for the power may be of God when the abuse of the power commeth of the deuill and of mans owne corruption as Saul had his kingly power from God but he abused it vnto crueltie and the assuming of that power and the entring into it is often vnlawfull as Abimelech by crueltie aspired the gouernment Iudg. 9. 4. Beside the same author obserueth well a difference betweene the Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall regiment for the first is so from God that yet the institution thereof may be deuised by man as a king may in his kingdome according to the necessitie of the state erect new officers and ministers and therefore it is called the ordinance of man 1. Pet. 2.13 but the spirituall power is immediately instituted of God and therefore the Apostle saith Eph. 4.11 He gaue some to be Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists c. Thus farre Tolet goeth well but this that is well said he corrupteth with a dramme of his Popish dregges that Christ gaue this power to make Bishops and other Ecclesiasticall ministers to Peter which power in successores eius amanavit c. did issue forth to all his posteritie and so saith he all Ecclesiasticall power did not immediately come from Christ but onely prima potestas the first power out of the which the rest doe slow but so is it not in the secular state Contra. 1. As though the other Apostles did not as well constitute Bishops Elders and other officers as well as Peter the Deacons Act. 7. were chosen by the common consent of the Apostles and Paul and Barnabas ordained Elders in euery Church Act. 14.23 2. it will be hard for him to prooue the Pope to be Peters successor and to succeede in his Apostolicall power 3. If the originall Ecclesiasticall power onely were immediatly from Christ so is it in the secular also for that originally hath Gods immediate warrant that there should be rulers and gouernors ouer the people and so there should be no difference at all in this behalfe 4. Wherefore we acknowledge this a true difference betweene the Ciuill and Ecclesiasticall state propounded by Tolet but againe reiected and disavowed by him that euery Ecclesiasticall office and ministrie was immediatly instituted by Christ and his Apostles though now mediatly by the Church men are assumed to these offices but in the Civill gouernment the institution onely in generall is from God many particular offices haue beene inuented by men 4. Quest. Whether euery superiour power be of God That euery Magistracie and gouernment is not of God it may be thus obiected 1. The Lord saith by his Prophet Hoshea 8.4 they haue set vp Princes but not by me they haue made Princes and I knew it not 2. A tyrannicall gouernment is not of God but many gouernments in the world are tyrannicall as of the Turks and Mahometans 3. Magistrates are created and appointed by men and S. Peter calleth them humane ordinances 1. Pet. 2.13 therefore they are not all of God 4. Sathan is called the prince of the world Ioh. 14.30 yea the god of the world 2. Cor. 4.4 and he taketh vpon him to distribute the kingdomes of the world Matth. 4.9 therfore they are not of God 5. And if euery power were of God then the supreame authoritie which the Pope challengeth ouer the vniuersall Church should be of God Ans. First in generall this distinction is to be premised which may serue to dissolue euery particular obiection we must make a difference betweene the power in it selfe considered and the way of attaining vnto that power and the vse or manner of execution the first is alwaies of God but not the second and the third for when any by briberie crueltie or any other corrupt meanes attaineth vnto any Magistracie or if he abuse his power to the maintenance of superstition and to oppresse the people of God in neither of these respects is it said to be of God Origen doth thus illustrate this by the similitude of the parts of the bodie as the sight and hearing are naturall faculties giuen vs of God and yet men may abuse them ad impia iniqua ministeria to wicked and vngodly seruices Chrysostome sheweth this difference by the example of mariage carnall copulation lawfully vsed in marriage is of God yet there may be an vnlawfull cohabitation and copulation with women which is not of God so in the Magistracie we must distinguish betweene the institution and the abuse thereof the first is of God so is not the other now for a further answear in particuliar we say 1. To the first place obiected out of Hoshea diuerse answears are made 1. Hierome thinketh that the Prophet speaketh of Saul who was chosen errore populi non voluntate Domini by the error of the people not by the will of God but it is euident that the Prophet in that place toucheth the preposterous setting vp of Ieroboam and his idolatrie as v. 5. Thy calfe O Samaria did cast thee off 2. Wherefore the better answear is that concerning the thing it selfe the renting of the kingdome from Salomon and giuing of tenne tribes to Ieroboam was the Lords owne act as the Prophet Ahiah saith 1. King 11.31 but in respect of the circumstances as the rebellion of the people against their lawfull king and their falling away from his obedience without consulting with God so was it not the Lords act Pareus 3. Pet. Martyr saith further that he is said to haue raigned but not by God in respect of the manner of his gouernement quia se non accomodavit ad scriptam patefactam Dei voluntatem because he applyed not himselfe to the written and reuealed will of God 3. Faius putteth both these answears together that Ieroboam and such other gouernours are said to raigne but not by God because they invade the kingdome praeter ordinem c. beside or contrarie to the order instituted of God sibi non Deo regnant they raigne for themselues not vnto the honour and glorie of God yet the power it selfe which they haue is of God to this purpose Gregorie writeth well as he is alleadged in the ordinarie glosse tumoris elatio non ordo potestatis in crimine est potentiam Deus distribuit elationem potentiae malitia nostrae mentis invenit the swelling pride not the orderly power is to be blamed God giueth the power but the proud vsage of the power the malice of mans minde hath found out c. 2. Tyrannicall gouernement as it is tyrannicall is not of God for that is the fault and corruption of the gouernour but the power it selfe of gouerning is notwithstanding of God riches gotten by vsurie extortion and other
words would beget an erroneous sense for all things that are are not ordained of God as warre sickenes pouertie for then it were not lawfull to preuent any of these for Gods ordinance must not be resisted 2. Origen omitteth this clause altogether and Erasmus coniectureth that this clause might be inserted by some interpreter by way of explanation but seeing Chrysostome hath it and the Syrian interpreter with other auncient copies this conceite cannot be admitted 3. Neither yet is it a repetition of the same thing which the Apostle set downe before euerie power is of God to shewe God to be author and founder of these powers as Oecum for there had beene here no great neede or vse of such repetition 4. Haymo thinketh that the Apostle in the second place vnderstandeth iura potestatum the rights belonging to these powers that not onely the power it selfe but the right of gouerning is of God but these two cannot well be distinguished the power and the right of the power Beza thinketh that in the first place the Apostle in generall shewed the dignitie of the magistracie in the second the distribution of the same dignitie because there are diuerse degrees of magistracie to shewe ipsis â—â—fimis ordinibus c. that we are to yeeld obedience to the lowest orders of gouernement but this was comprehended in the former sentence Euerie power is of God that is whether superiour or inferiour none are excluded 5. Some doe inferre because the Apostle saith They are ordained c. that there is an order and certaine degrees in gouernement some are superiour to others Bonifacius 8. in the extravagant vnam sanctam but it is euident by the words following where the power is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ordinance of God that this ordaining hath reference vnto Gods institution not to the distinction and order of degrees in the powers But whereas Boniface in that place vpon this supposed ground buildeth the preheminence of the Ecclesiasticall power aboue the Ciuill and so would make the Pope the Lord peramount aboue all the vanitie of this conceite shall be examined among the controversies following 6. Theodoret by ordaining vnderstandeth the diuine prouidence the ordinar glosse interpreteth rationabiliter disposita reasonably disposed but more is signified then so for there are many things disposed of in the world by Gods prouidence which yet it is lawfull to resist as Tolet noteth annot 4. 7. Wherefore the emphasis or force of this sentence lyeth in the word ordained which amplifieth that which the Apostle said before that these powers are not simply of God as other things but specially ordained that is by speciall precept from God there are other things of God as famine warre sickenes pouertie but not ordained by precept and commandement Thus Tolet likewise Faius that by ordaining is vnderstood praeceptum esse à Deo that it is commanded of God that obedience should be yeelded to magistrates so also before them both Hyperius and three wayes may these powers be said to be ordained or ordered first in respect of God because thy are by him instituted and appointed secondly in regard of themselues the Lord hath set them certaine limits and bounds whereby they should be ordered thirdly in respect of those which are to be ordered God would haue order among men some to rule some to obey like as in a campe there are some leaders and captaines others are appointed to followe and to be ranged in their rankes as the souldiers Pareus Quest. 7. Of not resisting the power 1. He that resisteth the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifieth disordered or counter-ordered ordered against which sheweth that all rebellion is a disorder 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a verie confusion Pareus 2. Diuerse wayes is the power resisted either aperta vi by open violence and rebellion or fraude by deceipt and craft when the power is deceiued and misinformed which is an ordinarie thing in Princes Courts Martyr Tolet addeth a third qui praecepta negligit c. he that neglecteth the precepts of the Prince and withholdeth duties as to pay tribute and such like therein sheweth himselfe contrarie to Gods ordinance 3. Chrysostome obserueth the phrase that the Apostle saith not he which obeyeth the Magistrate therein submitteth himselfe to Gods ordinance but by the contrarie he that resisteth the power resisteth Gods ordinance to shewe that non gratiam sed debitum illis obediendo praestemus c. that we doe not shewe them a pleasure in obeying but pay our debt and further he inferreth that no man should thinke subiectionem turpem that this subiection is vile seeing God hath appointed it 4. Origen here also noteth that we must not vnderstand such powers as persecute the faith for in such a case it is better to obey God then man and the reason is as Tolet obserueth quia nemo debet potestati obedire contra Deum no man must obey the power against God of whom the power is 5. Gorrhan maketh this obiection that if it be not lawfull to resist any power which is of God then not the power of Sathan he answeareth that it doth not followe because that is potestas permissionis non commissionis a power of permission not of commission or rather it is not so much a power which the deuill exerciseth as an abuse of power and therefore we are to resist him And so concerning such powers which commaund or allure to any thing which is euill Augustines rule must be followed contemne potestatem timendo maiorem potestatem contemne the power by fearing a greater power 6. Pet. Martyr well obserueth here that although it be not lawfull to resist the powers by rising vp or practising against them yet one may make an escape by fleeing away from the force of the magistrate as Dauid was let downe at a window out of his owne house by his wife and so escaped Sauls hands and so was Paul at Damascus let downe in a basket by a windowe as 2. Cor. 11. but the case is otherwise when one is apprehended and committed to prison for then he thinketh it not lawfull for a man though vniustly imprisoned to breake prison because it is against the lawe audaciam idem faciendi c. and it would minister boldnesse to malefactors to commit the like adde hereunto that thereby an other mans life is endaungered as the keeper vpon the escape of his prisoners is like to be punished and further it were a betraying of their cause to make a priuie escape this made S. Paul that though his bonds were loosed and the prison doores opened yet he would not flee away nay he refused to be sent away priuily when the gouernours sent vnto them to depart Act. 16. yet euerie escape of the innocent out of prison is not to be condemned if it be not procured by some sinister practise by themselues as by fraud or violence but by some other meanes as the
and equitie to his subiects and forceth them to Idolatrie and false religion 2. if that without such defence they cannot be safe their liues bodies and consciences 3. that vnder pretence of such defense they seeke not their owne reuenge with other respects vnto themselues 4. that all things be done with moderation not to the vndoeing of the state but the preseruation of it his reasons are these 1. From the institution of God and the end of the ordinance of Magistracie which is to be auenged of euill doers and for the praise of the good they doe not beare the sword for naught the inferiour Magistrates then hauing the sword may exercise their power in restraining the tyrannie of superior gouernours and for this cause inferiour Magistrates are ioyned with the superior not onely as helpers but to moderate their licentious and outragious gouerment and therefore where they bridle the insolencie of Tyrants vtuntur gladio per legitimam vocationem diuinitus sibi tradito they vse the sword deliuered vnto them from God by a lawfull vocation 2. Like as a furious and mad man may be remooued from the gouerment as Nabuchadnezer was cast forth by publike authoritie Dan. 4.31 so a Tyrant also who differeth not from a mad and furious man 3. They which haue power to constitute the Magistrate as where they enter by election of the Senat consent of the people or by other electors appointed haue power also to restraine their immoderate gouerment 4. This is confirmed by many commendable examples out of sacred and forren stories the people resisted Saul that he should not put Ionathan his sonne to death 1. Sam. 14.45 the Israelites in the time of the Iudges often were deliuered by their Iudges whom God raised vp from their oppressors Athalias was remooued from her tyrannicall gouernment 2. kin 11. the Macchabees defended thēselues and their country against the rage and furie of the Syrian Kings the Romans expelled their vitious Kings so did they depose their cruell Emperors as Nero Maximinus Traianus is commended for that saying when he gaue the sword vnto a chiefe officer hoc pro me vtere si iusta imperavero contra me si iniusta c. vse that for me if I command iust things and against me if vniust The Prince Electors remooued Wencelaus a man giuen to idlenes and luxurious life from the Empire in his stead appointing Rupertus the Countie of Palatine one of the Electors to this purpose Pareus But here certaine differences are to be obserued for where either there is an extraordinarie calling as in the time of the Iudges or where the kingdome is vsurped without any right as by Athaliah or where the land is oppressed by forren invaders as in the time of the Macchabees or where the gouernment is altogether Electiue as the Empire of Germanie in all these cases there is lesse question of resistance to be made by the generall consent of the states And yet where none of these concurre God forbid that the Commonwealth and Church should be left without remedie the former conditions obserued when either havock is made of the Commonwelth or of the Church and religion How farre priuate men may be warranted in denying obedience vnto Tyrants Here Pareus hath two propositions 1. That it is not lawfull for a priuate man without a lawfull calling to take armes either before the daunger to invade a tyrant or to defend thēselues in the time of daunger or to revenge himselfe after daunger if he may be defended by an ordinarie power c. for vnlawfully to resist the power is to resist Gods ordinance and one ought rather to die then to sinne and here that saying of the Lacedemonians taketh place si duriora morte imperetis potius moriemur if ye command things more heauie then death we will chuse rather to die 2. His other position is That it is lawfull for subiects beeing meere priuate men if a Tyrant as a theefe and violater of chastitie doe offer them violence and they neither can implore the ordinarie power nor by any other meanes escape the daunger to defend themselues and theirs for the present against a Tyrant as against a private person that maketh an assault for if it should not be lawfull to make such resistance in case of necessitie there should be no remedie left against the furious outrage of Tyrants which would tend to the vtter dissolution of humane societie and beside against whom defense by the Magistrate is lawfull in case of necessitie where that cannot be had a priuate defense is allowed for then leges armant privatos the lawes doe arme priuate men but it is lawfull for the inferior Magistrates to defend the priuate subiects in cases before limited against the furie and outrage of Tyrants Ergo c. to this purpose Pareus But this last position of his must receiue some further qualification for if a priuate man might lawfully defend himselfe when any notorious wrong is offered to him by a Tyrant men in this case should be iudges of their owne wrongs and as their iudgement is partiall in their owne case so they would take great libertie to defend themselues wherefore these conditions must further be here obserued 1. It must be considered whether in these wrongs that are offered the Tyrant doe transgresse his owne lawes if he doe then he is held to be but as privatus grassator a priuate assaulter otherwise if the lawes beare him out in these wrongs they are rather to suffer and endure then vse any resistance as the band of Christian souldiers which were put to the sword for their Christian faith at the commandement of the cruell Emperor Maximianus resisted not but yeelded themselues Otto Phrinsigens lib. 2. c. 45 because then the lawes of the Empire were for the maintenance of Idolatrie and a whole Citie of Phrygia professing Christianitie was destroyed and burnt with fire vsing no resistance Euseb. lib. 8. c. 11. 2. The subiect must wisely discerne whether he be forced to be an agent or patient in these wrongs he is rather to die then to be compelled to consent to any euill as a woman attempted by a Tyrant to adulterie should resist rather vnto death then prostitute her body but if they be patients onely and are not forced to doe any thing or consent against their conscience the case is otherwise 3. It must be also waighed wherein this wrong is offered if it be onely in the goods and substance of the subiect no resistance is to be made for the goods of the subiect are more lyeable to the command of the Magistrate then any thing beside so Naboth refused to yeeld his inheritance and patrimonie vnto Ahab but without any resistance but if a mans life be assaulted or the chastitie of his wife or the libertie and safetie of his children against all colour of law nature teacheth a man here to vse defence 4. Further the cause must be considered for the which
order of placing the Epistles and why this to the Romanes is set first 20. qu. Vnto whome this Epistle to the Romanes was written and from whence 21. qu. Of the excellencie and worthines of this Epistle Questions vpon the first Chapter Quest. 1. Why Paul setteth his name before this Epistle 2. qu. Of the two names of the Apostle Saul and Paul what they signifie 3. quest Vpon what occasion the name Saul was turned to Paul 4. qu. At what time the Apostles name beganne to be called Paul 5. qu. In what sense Paul calleth himselfe the seruant of Iesus Christ. 6. qu. How Paul calleth himselfe a seruant seeing Christ saith I will not call you seruants Ioh. 15.15 7. qu. How S. Paul saith called to be an Apostle 8. qu. Of the office and calling of an Apostle what it is 9. qu. Diuers points wherein consisteth the excellencie of the Apostleship 10. qu. How S. Paul is said to be set or put apart for the Gospel of God 11. qu. Of the description of the Gospel 12. qu. Whether the Gospel be comprehended in the old Testament 13. qu. How Christ is saide to be made of Dauid after the flesh 14. qu. How it can be shewed that Christ was borne of the seede and posteritie of David 15. qu. Whether Christ descended of David by Salomon or Nathan 16. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 4. declared mightily to be the Sonne of God c. 17. qu. Of the meaning of these words declared to be the Sonne of God in power 18. qu. Of these words according to the spirit of sanctification v. 4. 19. qu. Of these words by the resurrection of the dead 20. qu. Of these words v. 5. By whome we haue receiued grace and Apostleship 21. qu. Of the persons whome the Apostle saluteth To all you that be at Rome c. 22. qu. What the Apostle vnderstandeth by grace and peace v. 7. 23. qu. Of Pauls giuing of thankes for the faith of the Romanes which was published abroad v. 8. 24. qu. How the faith of the Romanes was published through the world 25. qu. Of the singular faith of the Romans 26. qu. Whether the Church of Rome were first founded by S. Peter 27. qu. The place Act. 28.21 reconciled 28. qu. Whether this be an oath God is my witnesse v. 9. 29. qu. Whether it be lawfull to sweare and vpon what occasion 30. qu. How Paul is said to serue in the spirit 31. qu. What prosperous iourney the Apostle meaneth v. 10. 32. qu. Whether S. Paul needed to be mutually strengthened by the faith of the Romanes 33. qu. Of the impediments whereby Saint Paul was letted to come vnto the Romans 34. qu. Why S. Paul expresseth not the cause in particular what letted him 35. qu. Whether Saint Pauls desire to goe to Rome beeing therein letted were contrarie to Gods will and so sinned therein 36. qu. How S. Paul was a debter vnto all v. 14. 37. qu. Whom S. Paul vnderstandeth by the Grecians and Barbarians 38. qu. How Paul is not ashamed of the Gospel v. 16. 39. qu. What the Gospel or Evangel signifieth 40. qu. Of the definition of the Gospel It is the power of God vnto saluation to euery one that beleeueth 41. qu. Of the difference betweene the Law and the Gospel 42. qu. Why the Iewes are named before the Grecians v. 16. 43. qu. The iustice or righteousnes of God is reuealed what iustice the Apostle meaneth 44. qu. Of the meaning of these words v. 17 is reuealed from faith to faith 45. qu. Whether the Apostle doth rightly cite this place out of the Prophet The iust by faith shall liue 46. qu. Whether S. Paul in citing this saying followeth the Prophets sense 47. qu. How the wrath of God is saide to be reuealed from heauen against all vnrighteousnes 48. qu. What it is to withhold the truth in vnrighteousnes v. 18. 49. qu. What the Apostle meaneth by these words v. 19. That which may be knowne of God is manifest in them 50. qu. Of the waies and meanes whereby the Lord doth manifest himselfe vnto men 51. qu. What invisible things of God the Apostle speaketh of and how they are made knowne vnto vs. 52. qu. Of the knowledge which the Philophers had of God and by what meanes they attained vnto it 53. qu. How other Scriptures that denie all knowledge of God vnto the wicked agree with this place of S. Paul 54. qu. Of the meaning of these words that they should be inexcusable v. 20. 55. qu. Whether there is any naturall knowledge of God in man 56. qu. Whether the naturall knowledge which the Heathen had of God was sufficient vnto saluation 57. qu. Whether any of the Philosophers were saued by that naturall knowledge which they had of God 58. qu. Seeing that the naturall knowledge which the Heathen had was not sufficient vnto saluation how are they thereby made inexcusable 59. qu. v. 21. How the Gentiles are said to haue knowne God and yet glorified him not as God 60. qu. v. 21. How the Gentiles did not glorifie God neither were thankefull but became vaine 61. qu. How the Gentiles changed the glorie of God into the image of men and beasts v. 23. 62. qu. Of the diuers kinds of idolatrie among the heathen in worshipping the images of men and beasts v. 23. 63. qu. Of the grosse idolatrie of the heathen in worshipping the images of men beasts v. 23. 64. qu. How God is saide to haue deliuered them to their owne hearts lusts v. 24. 65. qu. How the Gentiles are saide to defile their bodies in themselues 66. qu. How they worshipped the creature rather then the Creator 67. qu. Of the vnnaturall sinnes of the heathen 68. qu. How one sinne is punished by an other vpon these words And receiued in themselues such recompence of their error c. v. 27. 69. qu. How the Gentiles are said not to regard to know God v. 28. 70. qu. What it is to be deliuered vp to a reprobate minde 71. qu. Generall obseruations out of the Catalogue of the sinnes of the heathen reckoned vp by the Apostle v. 29 30. 72. qu. Of the order obserued by the Apostle in the particular enumeration of the sinnes of the Gentiles 73. qu. Of the particular sinnes of the Gentiles here rehearsed by the Apostle 74. qu. Of the true reading of the last vers 31. and the meaning thereof 75. qu. What a dangerous thing it is to be a fauourer and procurer of sinne in others 76. qu. How one may be accessarie to an others sinne 77. qu. Whether all the Gentiles were guiltie of the sinnes which are here rehearsed by the Apostle Questions vpon the second Chapter 1. qu. To whome the Apostle here speaketh Wherefore thou art inexcusable O man 2. qu. Whether one offend in iudging an other wherein he is guiltie himselfe 3. qu. Of these words v. 2. Wee know that the iudgement of God is according to truth 4. qu.